How do you determine player value in dynasty leagues? (1 Viewer)

[Biabreakable]

In doing the dynasty ranking polls gheemony brought up a very important idea on how to view weighted projections for players beyond the season currently in play. His method is to do projections giving a weighted value of 50% for the current season (2007) 33% to the next season (2008) and 17% to the season after that (2009).

One of the things that makes dynasty leagues so much more dynamic than redraft leagues is the different philosophies and strategy that each owner has when building a dynasty team and how each owner will value players differently because of that.

Some owners such as Nightshift and others have been very vocal in expressing a win now philosophy that focus almost entirely on only the current season. So thier projections/rankings would be much higher than 50% for the current season I would assume than the method proposed by gheemony. Other owners may use methods that give more weight to following seasons than this as well.

I am sure that a lot of owners will say each player is different and that they look at each player and situation differently because of that. And I can understand and agree with this however what I would like to discuss and find out here is what is the overall strategy and method that people use when approaching this and creating rankings. Unless your totaly going by gut there has to be some way that you compare players of similar value in order to decide which one has more value than another.

So what methods do you use in determining player value in dynasty leagues?

 

[wannabee]

Bia, you have some great topics. This is a tough one to articulate. Here are some things I look at:

1. Draft picks and players have different "value" (real and perceived) at different times of the year.

2. There are always players that the "market" undervalues that can contribute to your team. I think of players like Driver, Vick, etc. that have a lower "perceived" value than "real" value.

3. I look for balance of the older veterans coming off of the prime of their careers and the young prospects. Many proponents of youth do so at the expense of established veterans that produce because they get bitten by the "potential" bug and are always waiting for a player, or five, to break out. Conversely, the "win now" dynasty owners put a ton of emphasis on today's production. When you hear them say they have a mix of you and old, it is more like they have vet players ranked in top 20 at their position and young players that are lucky to be ranked in top 60 at their position. But, to win (or be very competitive) for a long time, it takes balance. Many people do like to be "win now" because the payoff is immediate. For instance, in one dynasty league, my WRs are a mix of young and old with Driver, Housh, Colston, Branch, Muhsin. This is ideal for my tastes.

4. The hardest part of valuation of players is between positions. How do you compare Brees and Deuce? And what draft pick is equitable to Brees ... or Deuce? Those are the tough ones for me. To make things harder, much depends on the league scoring and the team strength. Sometimes, when comparing a player to a draft pick, I have to ask myself "if this player was able to be drafted, where would I take him?". I know many may disagree, but I have players like Turner, MBarber, etc. rated at pick 1.04 for this year. Take a QB like Brees or Brady Quinn. I would take Brees so I think he is worth at least pick 1.04, too. I am assuming Quinn will be the consensus 1.04 pick.

5. When I am talking "value" with a leaguemate, I will look at Points/game just to get very vague tiers.

6. It is so difficult to compare projections and have them affect value. We all project differently. Same goes for rankings. I do like to look at Bloom and Jeff's rankings just to make sure I am not too far off the beaten path. But, I look for situations to buy when I see a player I really like ranked very low. Those are the players I shoot for. And the players I look to sell are the ones that I think most have ranked higher than the "real" value.

7. I think this would be very easy if each of us had our rankings public. We could then look at where that owner has a particular player ranked so we could know (within a variance) what they would pay for a player or what it would take for a player just by looking at the players above and below in the rankings.

8. In general, I prefer young RBs, and veteran WRs, QBs, and TE. This is also where some value can be found. In addition, the RB career span is so short that it is difficult to pay a ton for a vet RB and win long term. But, with WRs, vet WRs are real cheap. Last offseason, the Matt Jones' of the world were worth MUCH more than the Drivers. This is where I think value can be found.

This is in no way exhaustive and I will add more as I think of it. Great topic, Bia.

***** I use "perceived" value as the value that the market puts on a player. And, the "real" value is the value that an equivalent producer of the player would cost, given similar age and circumstance.

 

[coolnerd]

 

[Pauli Walnuts]

Wannabee is the Ron Wolf of Dynasty League FF. Pure Genius.

 

[Biabreakable]

Over 120 views and only wannabee has any answers for this huh?

I guess this question is too advanced for the SP. My mistake.

 

[aposulli]

Over 120 views and only wannabee has any answers for this huh?I guess this question is too advanced for the SP. My mistake.

I can't decide which face is most appropriate...

 

[Mister CIA]

The reason I like dynasty FF so much is I play from the gut - and the more I study players and teams, the smarter my gut becomes.

Read, digest, rinse, repeat.

 

[aposulli]

In doing the dynasty ranking polls gheemony brought up a very important idea on how to view weighted projections for players beyond the season currently in play. His method is to do projections giving a weighted value of 50% for the current season (2007) 33% to the next season (2008) and 17% to the season after that (2009).One of the things that makes dynasty leagues so much more dynamic than redraft leagues is the different philosophies and strategy that each owner has when building a dynasty team and how each owner will value players differently because of that.Some owners such as Nightshift and others have been very vocal in expressing a win now philosophy that focus almost entirely on only the current season. So thier projections/rankings would be much higher than 50% for the current season I would assume than the method proposed by gheemony. Other owners may use methods that give more weight to following seasons than this as well.I am sure that a lot of owners will say each player is different and that they look at each player and situation differently because of that. And I can understand and agree with this however what I would like to discuss and find out here is what is the overall strategy and method that people use when approaching this and creating rankings. Unless your totaly going by gut there has to be some way that you compare players of similar value in order to decide which one has more value than another.So what methods do you use in determining player value in dynasty leagues?

Like Wannabee mentioned, I compare (young) players to where they stack up against the upcoming draft class when I am thinking of selling off a guy for picks.I've only been in one dynasty league but I can see how old guys are underrated. I'll take a guy who may only have a few years left in his career (as long as he's performing at a high level) anyday...think Tiki, Owens, Hasselbeck, several older DL and LBsAnother tough situation in evaluating potential draftees is favoring players in ideal situations or favoring players with awesome talent with not-so solid situations. Relying heavily on the latter may backfire becuase you don't want to get stuck with alot of talented real-life backups like Turner or Chris Perry, but on the other hand as some vets around here seem to know... talent rises to the top... (see Marion Barber)

 

[guderian]

I've tried different methods. I started using the method that you initially mentioned--50% weighting for year 1, 33% for year 2, and 17% for year 3. I didn't like this method because it required a lot of work (guessing at projections for years 2 and 3) and I didn't feel that guessing at projections 3 years out beat the educated "gut feeling".

I then ranked players by 'remaining productivity' using a 1-5 scale and used that to refine my picks of players that were in a similar range. Again, I didn't like that method either.

Since I'm in finance I started thinking about using something similar to the Black-Scholes where I'd factor in the volatility of types of players and use that to determine value. At that point, I finally concluded that I had gone too far and started going with the educated "gut feeling".

I still think that using the black-scholes model would be intriguing since it considers value, time, and volatility--all of the functions that one would want to factor into dynasty player valuations. There is even a component for an "exercise price"--which would essentially a minimum value. In our case that would be the VBD baseline.

 

[ExtraPoint]

For me it starts with the elite players. I want as many elite QBs/RBs/WRs/TEs in or before their prime age and as many young players who look on the verge of becoming an elite player as possible. Position isnt as important as the actual skill level of the elite player. Proven elites usually before my self-predicted elites.

After those, I want the older elite players (all positions) and non-elite young starting or future starting RBs. Again, as many as possible before worrying about things like what my team really needs.

After the elite players, you have the good players. An old player who isnt elite doesnt have much trade value. Yet good young players have plenty. Therefore, when looking at good players, age and position determines value more so than their skill. So, since all the elite players and young RBs are gone, the next setof most valueable players are the good prime age RBs and good young QBs, WRs, and TEs. Actually, this should be two categories with the RBs first.

Then, its the good older RBs and good prime age QBs/WRs/TEs.

Next are the prospect RBs and elite DTs (notice I'm not talking about IDPs). A prospect to me is not a Cedric Benson or Deangelo Williams. A prospect is a Ladell Betts, Waly Lundy, or Musa Smith type who only has an outside shot at getting a starting job. So by now, all RBs worth a roster spot are now accounted for.

Now comes the huge group. Good older, young medicre, and mediocre prime QBs/WRs/TEs can all go into the same big group. The older guys here while better performers, actually have less trade value than the younger mediocres. Why? Because while you consider the player mediocre, someone else in your league actually thinks the same player is good... or maybe he actually is good and nobody realizes it yet including you.

Next are good DTs.

Then you have mediocre DTs and prospect QB/WR/TEs. These prospects just dont hold all that much value. Often, roster space is wasted for years on a prospect who never does anything.

Now you have the scrub players. Below average losers taking up roster space but who arent really any better than the guys in the free agent pool. The bigger your roster size, the more of these you might have.

Finally, the guys with the lowest value of all... kickers. If I have to explain, I'd be teaching you fantasy 101.

So without making any predictions of future stats or how many years a player will play, I've just put a dynasty value on every player. I've based it only on skill (elite, good, mediocre, prospect, or scrub), actual age, and actual position. Of the three, only skill is subjective. I've left out the value of a player's team. That is partially already factored into the skill category in both quality and opportunity. It would also require much more explanation on my part to include it. So I wont.

 

[thatguy]

In dynasty leagues, primarily in initial dynasty drafts but also for trade purposes, the QB position CAN be far more valuable than it tends to be in redrafts. The trick is finding a QB that you KNOW will be good for a long time. Right now, I think only Peyton and Carson really fit this billing. Brees very likely will soon, but I think we'll have to see what he does next season first. Brady might, but with the Pats gameplan so different from week to week, he's not quite as consistent and thus less desireable. DNabb absolutely would if not for the injury concerns. I think that Leinart will be in this group by 2008.

Having a QB like Peyton or Carson is so valuable in that you KNOW you don't have to address need at the QB position for a long time. Other positions tend to be far more volatile from year to year, and therefore, in initial dynasty drafts, it is often wise to take a Peyton or Carson in the first or second round before going after a RB or WR who may or may not give you solid production for years to come.

After guys like LT, LJ, SJax, Steve Smith, and perhaps a few others (I'm sure I could think of five or so others but these are a few who come to mind), who can you say with certainly will continue to produce at a high level after this season? Instead of taking a "gamble" on a guy like Ronnie Brown or CP, or KJ, JJ, McGahee in years past, I think it's wise to take a Carson or Peyton. Sure, they may have a down year this season, but you can be sure that for the next 5 years or more, they'll give you, on average, 30 TDs and 4000 yards passing. And even in their down years, you'll probably still get near top 5 production.

Contrarily, in redraft leagues, it's not generally wise to take either of these guys this early merely because you risk getting them in a season when they only throw for 25 TDs and 3500 yards and therefore, you may not get good value.

Hope this makes sense. I'm tired, but it's my 2 cents.

ETA: Please realize I'm not suggesting that CP, RB, KJ et al. are busts, but simply that because their production is so volatile year to year (whether it be related to injury, new scheme, new personell, inexperience, whatever), I'd rather have Carson or Peyton on my dynasty team.

 

[EBF]

I try to identify guys who have the talent to last in the league. These are the guys that you want on your dynasty roster. How do you identify these guys? Tough to say. Everyone has their own methods. I usually consider the following two factors:

1. Pedigree - Important for a young player. Was he a high draft pick? Was he considered a great talent coming into the league? Was he a star in college? I'm always wary of guys who come out of nowhere. Every now and then you get a Willie Parker or a Marques Colston, but the majority of the top players in FF were chosen in the first three rounds of their NFL draft. I feel more comfortable taking a risk on an untested young player if I know he dominated in college and was an early pick.

2. Track record - Is he productive when given opportunities? I don't think anyone thought Frank Gore would lead the NFL in rushing yards, but he was an early pick and he was productive last year when given touches. We shouldn't have been surprised by his emergence. It's dangerous to get too excited about players who haven't fully proven themselves, but it's still important to look at stats. A guy like Chester Taylor screamed starter when you looked closely at his numbers. Right now, Michael Turner, DeAngelo Williams, Maurice Drew, and a few other guys are looking like solid bets to emerge in future seasons (although their price tags are pretty high).

Stats are also extremely important when evaluating veterans. You can't argue with a guy like Reggie Wayne or Jeremy Shockey. Just look at the stats. These kind of guys are great bets for your team because they've proven their worth year in and year out.

For QBs, a stat that I like to look at is yards per pass attempt. Everyone knows about yards per carry, but for some reason, almost no one acknowledges the importance of yards per pass attempt. I think it's probably the most useful stat for evaluating a QB's FF potential.

Anyhow, for each player you try to look at what they've done with their opportunities. It's important to recognize when players blow opportunities (like Green and Suggs in Cleveland), but also to recognize when they take advantage of opportunities (I picked up Bernard Berrian in all of my money dynasty leagues this summer because I knew he was a star in college, a third round NFL draft pick, and because he started to catch some balls down the stretch in 2005).

Also, it's important not to bury guys who haven't had a chance to succeed. I wouldn't give up on guys like Ryan Moats, Brian Calhoun, LenDale White, Marcedes Lewis, Chad Jackson, Derek Hagan, and Matt Jones just yet. These are good players with good pedigrees. They won't all pan out, but some of them will. They just haven't quite gotten the right opportunities yet.

So that's basically it. It boils down to talent and track record. Talent is best measured by draft position, college production, and personal evaluation. Track record is best measured by statistical analysis.

I don't worry too much about age after the first 6-7 rounds, but I tend to avoid RBs who are 28 or older and WRs who are 31-32 or older.

 

[EBF]

In dynasty leagues, primarily in initial dynasty drafts but also for trade purposes, the QB position CAN be far more valuable than it tends to be in redrafts. The trick is finding a QB that you KNOW will be good for a long time. Right now, I think only Peyton and Carson really fit this billing. Brees very likely will soon, but I think we'll have to see what he does next season first. Brady might, but with the Pats gameplan so different from week to week, he's not quite as consistent and thus less desireable. DNabb absolutely would if not for the injury concerns. I think that Leinart will be in this group by 2008.Having a QB like Peyton or Carson is so valuable in that you KNOW you don't have to address need at the QB position for a long time. Other positions tend to be far more volatile from year to year, and therefore, in initial dynasty drafts, it is often wise to take a Peyton or Carson in the first or second round before going after a RB or WR who may or may not give you solid production for years to come. After guys like LT, LJ, SJax, Steve Smith, and perhaps a few others (I'm sure I could think of five or so others but these are a few who come to mind), who can you say with certainly will continue to produce at a high level after this season? Instead of taking a "gamble" on a guy like Ronnie Brown or CP, or KJ, JJ, McGahee in years past, I think it's wise to take a Carson or Peyton. Sure, they may have a down year this season, but you can be sure that for the next 5 years or more, they'll give you, on average, 30 TDs and 4000 yards passing. And even in their down years, you'll probably still get near top 5 production.Contrarily, in redraft leagues, it's not generally wise to take either of these guys this early merely because you risk getting them in a season when they only throw for 25 TDs and 3500 yards and therefore, you may not get good value.Hope this makes sense. I'm tired, but it's my 2 cents.ETA: Please realize I'm not suggesting that CP, RB, KJ et al. are busts, but simply that because their production is so volatile year to year (whether it be related to injury, new scheme, new personell, inexperience, whatever), I'd rather have Carson or Peyton on my dynasty team.

I tend to agree with you. I've never regretted using an early pick on a guy like McNabb or Bulger, but I've set my team back years by taking guys like William Green and Charles Rogers too soon. When in doubt, take a guy who has shown he can play. Drafting Todd Heap in the 5th won't kill you. You'll have plenty of other picks to blow on overrated WRs and RBs.

 

[-OZ-]

For QBs, a stat that I like to look at is yards per pass attempt. Everyone knows about yards per carry, but for some reason, almost no one acknowledges the importance of yards per pass attempt. I think it's probably the most useful stat for evaluating a QB's FF potential.

I'm pretty sure you don't mean to look at this in a vacuum, but keep in mind, Palmer's YPA in 2004 and 2005 were 6.71 and 7.54; Peyton Manning was in the 7's for most of his career (banner year of 9.17 in 2004), while Ben Roethlisberger has been 8.88 in 2004 and 8.90 in 2005. I'd be interested to see how well this stat indicates future success, on a larger scale.

 

[Biabreakable]

Over 120 views and only wannabee has any answers for this huh?I guess this question is too advanced for the SP. My mistake.

I can't decide which face is most appropriate...

I think this one I was throwing down the gauntlet as it were to challenge people here. I know there are many in the SP who have very good understanding of this as well as having many differing perspectives and ways they approach this animal.Put your on because this ones going to be good.ETA- Chris Carter is the man. All he does is catch TDs. Him and John Randle are the only things that kept the Vikings from becoming the Detroit Lions after the Hershel Walker deal.

 

[FunkyPlutos]

I have this philosophy:

1. Trade vets that I feel have reached a peak to a team on the playoff fringe right before the trade deadline, especially if said veteran is on my bench anyway, for a future 1st round pick (next year). It usually works out because the team won't make the playoffs (more often than not) and that 1st round pick is then a high pick.

2. Trade picks for veterans or 2nd year players right before the draft (or even better - during the draft).

This is the best way to get value out of your players.

 

[Biabreakable]

I've tried different methods. I started using the method that you initially mentioned--50% weighting for year 1, 33% for year 2, and 17% for year 3. I didn't like this method because it required a lot of work (guessing at projections for years 2 and 3) and I didn't feel that guessing at projections 3 years out beat the educated "gut feeling". I then ranked players by 'remaining productivity' using a 1-5 scale and used that to refine my picks of players that were in a similar range. Again, I didn't like that method either. Since I'm in finance I started thinking about using something similar to the Black-Scholes where I'd factor in the volatility of types of players and use that to determine value. At that point, I finally concluded that I had gone too far and started going with the educated "gut feeling".I still think that using the black-scholes model would be intriguing since it considers value, time, and volatility--all of the functions that one would want to factor into dynasty player valuations. There is even a component for an "exercise price"--which would essentially a minimum value. In our case that would be the VBD baseline.

Interesting. I looked up the Black-Scholes model to get a general idea of what that is. So what would be the formula used in addition to VBD then?

 

[-OZ-]

Over 120 views and only wannabee has any answers for this huh?I guess this question is too advanced for the SP. My mistake.

I can't decide which face is most appropriate...

I think this one I was throwing down the gauntlet as it were to challenge people here. I know there are many in the SP who have very good understanding of this as well as having many differing perspectives and ways they approach this animal.Put your on because this ones going to be good.

Part of the problem, IMO, is that there's so many different ways to value players, that there isn't one good answer. Makes for good discussion though. I value players in different leagues differently. Not only because the scoring is different (key BTW), but because I'm probably using different approaches to each league. Different players hold different values to a team contending vs. rebuilding / reloading. In an initial draft, what is your plan? This tends to be overlooked sometimes as people just draft "best player available" with a blind eye to how each player fits their plans. I personally value 2nd and 3rd year players higher than rookies overall, especially in an initial draft. This year for example, if I were to be drafting a new team, the only high profile rookies I'd rank high enough to even have a chance at drafting are Peterson, Lynch and CJ. Most other rookies that will go in the 1st round, tend to go entirely too high. This also goes to the idea of trading later 1st round picks for a young player who has yet to either have his chance (Turner) or has to learn more (Matt Jones, Cutler, Campbell types). Just to illustrate, in one initial draft which included rookies, I didn't draft a rookie until pick #203, where I took Chris Henry. I missed out on a few valuable players, but overall rookies were overvalued. For awhile, I found WRs 28 years or older were really good values. These guys are "unsexy" players, but can fill the core of a successful team. Basically, everyone wants the next big thing and often overlook true value to get it. Doesn't help with your values, but just my ETA: Thankfully, I have yet to go through a complete rebuild, but reloading also changes a player's value.

 

[coolnerd]

Over 120 views and only wannabee has any answers for this huh?I guess this question is too advanced for the SP. My mistake.

Trust me you did not want my half a bottle of wine logic or typing from last night. It is a great question, but it seems like the response to these type questions are the best post Superbowl. Anyway here is an attempt for you. Overall, I vary my valuation depending on scoring, league sizes, rules etc. I don't have a mathmatical type of mind so there is not percentage formula, but here is a template that I adjust.QB- I think 5 years out for my primary starter. 2 or 3 years out for back-ups. In general, I value QBs more than most in dynasty leagues. A consistent QB has more value for you week to week than in trade. Unlike redraft, there is not always a guy available. the Damon Huards happen every year, but I really don't wish to bet on finding them.RB- I only evaluate two years out on RBs. While this is the most important position in many leagues, it is also the most dynamic. Because of my extremely short term view of RBs, I attempt not to overpay for anyone and prefer to be deep there with hopefuls when I can. WR- I analyze four years at WR for my core WRs. Outside of that I analyze year to year. I look for production over potential. In most leagues, I carry only one or two young guys that have to develop. Also, I believe that WRs stay in their peek until 32ish and are still productive until at least 35. The biggest upside to young Wrs with potential is that they often draw more in trade than worth while veterans go for less than they should. TE- 3 years. At the top of the TE food chain, the elite players stay forever, but once you get past that handful, those guys become interchangeable, and relatively easy acquire. K- 5 years. I like one kicker I don't have to worry about. Kickers don't really get old. That said, if I don't have a good one I will treat this as a total week to week thing until I get someone who looks to be in a good long-term situation. DEF- 1 year. Because of the number of moving parts, too much changes in this position from year to year.

 

[Tick]

I treat positions differently...

At QB, I've noticed that I have no idea how long a guy is going to play. I thought Favre, McNair, and Green would all be gone by now, and all three are doing fine this season. For that reason, I'm starting to think that older QBs might be a really nice value, particularly in a startup draft. Grab a ton of other guys early, maybe a prospective QB who's going to get a shot down the road when you have to, then pick up an old guy who'll start for a couple of years, not knowing if he'll hang on even longer. On the other hand, it's a nice anchor for your team if you can secure a young good QB, since they could be your starter for the next 10 years.

At WR, I like taking good young players, because again, you can fell fairly sure that your guy will be good for the next five-plus years. In my startups the last three seasons, I've picked up Holt, Boldin, Chad Johnson twice, and Moss in the first four rounds, then DJax twice in the fifth round. Moss has fizzled, but the rest of those guys are solid building blocks on my team both now and for awhile to come. A guy like Fitz should be dominant for the next 10 years and is undervalued in dynasty startups IMO.

At RB, I only look a couple of years into the future. With the injuries, RBBCs, trades, drug suspensions, etc. that seem to hit the RB position harder than any other, thinking of your RB as a long-term investment is pretty risky. I do look at age, of course, but probably not as much as some other people. One scary situation is the guy who played about 12 games as a rookie and looked good down the stretch. The next season, he seems to turn into AThomas, WGreen, KJones, or JJones too often lately. I'm not sure how to avoid making that mistake, because ignoring them altogether is just silly as you'll miss out on a stud half the time. Here again, I think older players are undervalued a bit. At RB, I think taking the old stud is better than taking the promising young player. Tiki Barber won championships for guys for the last couple of seasons while lots of first-rounders have been disappointing. Something seems to be changing in the NFL that is holding down young RBs, so getting a guy who's dependable is starting to look more and more attractive.

At TE, there are only about a dozen worth owning, really. Get one and hold him, and go lean at the position. There's no real point in thinking about ages at TE since apart from Gonzo, all the useful guys are still young anyway... so just get the best guy you can value-wise in your startup draft.

At PK, age means nothing, but I'm sure people know that already.

 

[Faust]

 

[Tick]

7. I think this would be very easy if each of us had our rankings public. We could then look at where that owner has a particular player ranked so we could know (within a variance) what they would pay for a player or what it would take for a player just by looking at the players above and below in the rankings.

I agree with that. Once we had put together the consensus rankings last offseason, I put up my rankings... within a couple of weeks, I had shuffled around my RBs in my leagues, trading for guys I felt were more valuable. Ricky Williams was the best example - I had him ranked lower than anyone else did. I swapped him straight-up for TJ Duckett and Ahman Green in different leagues. I got players I valued higher, and so did my trading partners: perfect trades. Without the discussion on this board and people contributing to consensus rankings, those trades never would have happened.

 

[Tick]

Oh, another thing that helps me...

When making my rankings, I make lists of similar players... for WRs, I think about each team and add all their WRs to the following lists:

1. Studs <32

2. Over 32

3. Young starters who aren't studs

4. Rooks/2nd years.

5. Non-starter veterans

After that, I rank within a group. Then I roll them all together.

For example, in the Studs<32, I start out with SSmith-Chad-Fitz-Holt. In Over 32, I go Harrison-Owens. In Young starters, I go Evans-Bryant-Branch. In Rooks/2nd years, I go Colston-Edwards. In non-starter vets, I go with... well, it doesn't really matter - those guys are useless.

Next, I only have to look at four players at a time to pick who's next in my ratings. Whoever's at the top of each of the four lists gets compared against each other.

For me, it really helps me to focus my attention... WRs can get pretty tough to sort out when you're looking at 100 guys and trying to figure out where to rank Edwards vs. Branch vs. Owens vs. Burress vs. any number of other guys. Slim that down to a four-way choice and it's a lot easier.

 

[Biabreakable]

Some very good ideas here and different approaches to creating rankings. I think it does make life easier ranking players by position but it still leaves open the question of how do you compare the value of players in different positions?

Rbs tend to be highly valued because of position scarcity. Although with the glut of servicable Rbs in the league right now I think this is becoming less the case. After a quick perusal of Rb performance in my league I count 47 Rbs that have been startable at different times during the season. Injuries RBBC and depth have increased the number of Rbs that are worth rostering. The situation for these players can change so rapidly that a Rb can go from being a bench player to a must start in just a weeks time and some of them never look back. There are others who you know will be must starts if just given the opportunity.

In dynasty a player that does not play for you all year still has value. Because that player could end up being a full time starter for you in the following year. So how do you compare a backup Rbs value to a starting Wr for example?

Just for arguments sake I will assign abstact numbers to a Rb and Wrs performace over 3 years:

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3

Rb 0 100 100

Wr 60 60 55

Knowing this which one is more valuable? In year one the Rb is worthless. But over time is worth more than the Wr.

If your only looking at the value of a player for the current year then the Rb has no value in year one. You would not trade the Wr for the Rb because of this.

If your only giving value to Rbs for 2 years then the Wr is worth more to you than the Rb.

If your looking at 3 years the Rb is more valuable than the Wr and you would trade the Wr for the Rb in year one because of this.

Obviously situation and your teams roster/composition will effect what you percieve as need. But more what I am trying to get at here is how can you compare players to find out which is more valuable?

For me the way to do it is by using the 3 year statistical average for all players that have been in the league 3 or more years. I might take this further if the player has a longer history. I use this as a baseline for creating projections for that player in year one. If the player has not been in the league for 3 years then I have less data to use in making a year one projection. That requires more guesswork than the 3 year model offers.

If you are good at trading you can use the one year projection and continue to make moves to improve your team on this basis alone. Trade player X for player Y because your projection for player Y is higher. However if you are willing to project players for year 2 and year 3 (or even longer but I don't) then while increasing the chances your projections will be wrong you do open up larger differences between player values comparativly. The results of this may even be suprising to you when looked at objectivly.

I am not saying that this is the best method of valuing players and I do not recomend trusting your projections blindly. But the results may cause you to look at player values comparativly in a different light than you would be able to see them otherwise.

Things change very quickly in the NFL and anyone can tell you that projections for even one year will have a lot of errors because of things you did not predict happening. Knowing contract lengths for players (the player projected as well as supporting players) coupled with the players role on a team in addition to thier age and how that player has performed in the past are the primary guidelines you have to consider when making a long term projection. Perhaps some other considerations need to be included such as coaching staff and its stability.

You can also somewhat protect yourself by applying a weight to your projections like gheemoney suggested that gives higher value to your year one projection than the following years and use that product as an absolute value. Or another way to do this is to just use the one year projection (you could pull it from FBGs projections if you wanted to save time and effort) then apply a modifier to that based on how well you expect that player to maintain those projections over time.

Some players are much more stable than others. Qbs for example tend to stay with the same teams longer and produce at the same level from year to year more than other positions do. Once again contract length/coaching staff can give you clues as to how stable that players performance is likely to be or not be.

One thing you can never predict is injuries.

The hardest part of all this is figuring out the bench or developing players who have not had enough opportunity yet to gauge what you can expect from them. But that is where some of the greatest value can also be found. Sometimes that player who appears to be a scrub becomes a stud. If you can aquire that player cheaply before they do and it works out even close to how you think it will then you find yourself way ahead. It ushual does not take a great investment to take such a chance either.

Without doing some form of projecting for players I am not sure how I can identify these semi-unknowns that may break out however. And how can I compare thier value to other players? And so that is a big part of why I make the effort to do so.

 

[Biabreakable]

I've tried different methods. I started using the method that you initially mentioned--50% weighting for year 1, 33% for year 2, and 17% for year 3. I didn't like this method because it required a lot of work (guessing at projections for years 2 and 3) and I didn't feel that guessing at projections 3 years out beat the educated "gut feeling". I then ranked players by 'remaining productivity' using a 1-5 scale and used that to refine my picks of players that were in a similar range. Again, I didn't like that method either. Since I'm in finance I started thinking about using something similar to the Black-Scholes where I'd factor in the volatility of types of players and use that to determine value. At that point, I finally concluded that I had gone too far and started going with the educated "gut feeling".I still think that using the black-scholes model would be intriguing since it considers value, time, and volatility--all of the functions that one would want to factor into dynasty player valuations. There is even a component for an "exercise price"--which would essentially a minimum value. In our case that would be the VBD baseline.

Interesting. I looked up the Black-Scholes model to get a general idea of what that is. So what would be the formula used in addition to VBD then?

I am still curious about this. And welcome any other ideas and methods of approaching player values in dynasty. We have not heard too much from the win now proponents here yet.

 

[nightshift]

1. What is the scoring system & lineup requirements? NEVER lose sight of what it takes to win in this format. No matter what the experts rank a player, what you read, etc. Rank them for the format. Anything else means you will lose.

2. WIN NOW is every year. There's no tomorrow, no next year. Every year. Play as if it is your last, but bear in mind that you are playing dynasty. Sound like double talk? I can relate. You want the best players on your squad all the time. Large leagues with 24, 25, 26, etc. players allow you the luxury of farm team players. Okay, so what's the starting lineup requirements? Non-IDP, probably 9. With back-ups (all players get injured or have bye weeks), that means 18-20. Anything over that can be farm players.

3. The starting 9 have to be STARTERS THIS YEAR. Doesn't matter if it is their last year (Tiki) as long as the can produce at a decent level to allow you to win now. No rookies club @ draft time. At least in the starting 9. Example: Reggie Bush is going early - let him go.

4. RBs get hurt more than any other position. If you have to start 2, you need 4. BTW, RBs win more championships then any other position. DRAFT RBs EARLY. Replace often (farm team).

5. Get a TOP 5 QB. Hopefully, your QB position is a constant points position. No QBBC. Lowers your chances to win now.

9 starters + 2 decent RB backups = your focus @ draft time. The rest? 7 more vets needed. Once you have the 18 needed for a 9 starter format, now you can roll the bones on rookies. I tend to only carry a few, usually the looked over ones like FWP or Derrick Ward (high risk, high reward, or big goose egg)

First season is over.. so how do maintain your WIN NOW team? TRADE DRAFT PICKS. A decent WIN NOW squad should not fall below .500, ever. So what kind of draft picks do you really have? High ones. Trade them to onwers who overvalue rookies and undervalue vets. Take a middle of the road young RB (DeAngelo Williams) throw in a 1st round draft (hopefully the last one of the round) and trade for old man Marvin Harrison. He sucks, he's getting old, probably only has 1 good season left, etc. etc. etc. Somebody (usually quite a few) will always overvalue youth, get caught up in draft frenzy, and give you the missing player you need.

The best thing about dynasty draft picks is you always get more!

About the weight thing - although I do not have a system, I would say my personal view is 70% this year, 25% next, & 5% 3 yrs +.

Test yourself. This season draft a mock team (12 team league, 9 starters, QB, 2RB, 2WR, FLEX, TE, PK, DEF) for play 3 years from now. Hold that roster for 3 years and let me know your ability to predict the future.

 

[Biabreakable]

7. I think this would be very easy if each of us had our rankings public. We could then look at where that owner has a particular player ranked so we could know (within a variance) what they would pay for a player or what it would take for a player just by looking at the players above and below in the rankings.

This is an interesting idea. I wonder what the result would be if I did this in my leagues?I assume owners would use my ranking to try to sell players to me I am higher on than they are. I know that is what I would do with thier rankings. But thier knowing that I think I would lose my chance or at least part of my chance to get those players cheaper than I value them. I would also look at which players I felt were too low and try to buy them but if they know how much I value that player how could I get that player at a low value?I am not shooting down this idea down. I have never tried it before. I am just questioning if it would bring the desired result or not. Have you or has anyone else done this before? And what did it lead to?

 

[alg]

I generally do not like to respond to threads like this because I play with hard core sharks that will use everything I say against me. I am also someone who trades alot, and would prefer not kill my action. But in the spirit of the season, I offer the following observations:

1. Value is about one thing, and one thing only: PERCEPTION

All the formulas in the world, and enough number crunching to make an accountant ill ultimately leaves us NOWHERE when answering this primary FFB question. Now if you are an accountant and have the gift of making projections, then you are well prepared to make future performance projections. In a dynasty league, however, performance has less to do with trade value than one would expect. And value has NOTHING to do with your projections.

Value is relative to how two or more people evaluate the current and future performance of a player. If you play with sharks you know what I'm talking about. Did you ever make a deal because your trading partner got excited about your projections? Only impressionable dim-wits would be so easily manipulated. Unfortunately (or fortunately) I never get to make deals with guys like that.

2. Value is a 'thing' that is only realized within the context of a trade.

Each player on our rosters has a certain value that can only be realized relative to another persons perceptions, and only when a player exchange is culminated. It only takes one other person to see the value, but its there. This also makes it harder to determine because you often do not know who that owner is, or which owner values a player the most. Once exchanged, the player's value is established. One LT2 is worth blah blah blah. You traded him because he was worth more to another owner then to yourself.

3. Perception is based on potential.

After observing how some FBG owners operate (how they rank players and respond to position polls) I can honestly say that I wish my FFB compatriots shared such views. Naturally, every owner is different regarding specific players, but in general the 50/33/17 rule I have seen thrown around is, IMO, quite awful.

As has been noted FFB owners often see things differently, and one such difference is the degree with which owners take the 'win now' approach. This is relative, of course, and part of the equation when engaging in the trading process. In my experience, however, the longer the dynasty the experience, the less current performance equates to a player's potential in trade.

Take a recent FBG poll on WR #13 or 14. M Harrison was neck and neck with Lee Evans. Most who voted for MH referred to the 2 or 3 or 4 year "rule" that somehow constituted superior value. Don't get me wrong, this is a legitimate approach to establishing value, but IMO, it also embraces the biggest blunder in such rankings. Namely, the magical thinking that tells us that events in the universe proceed in a linear and predictable fashion. Nothing can be further from the truth.

Everyone knows that players decline with age, and we are always on the lookout for that terrible 'wall' of death. The thing is, no one knows where it is because each player is different. The one thing that we do know for sure is that every player will be visited by it if they stay long enough. And lets not forget how teams actually fluctuate. If the dynasty polls had been taken mid-season, how much you want to bet Grossman ended up a top 10 dynasty QB in the rankings? Or how about this one. Tom Brady didn't even make the Pro Bowl? The invincible Tom Brady. Say what you will about the PB, but no one can tell me he is playing at the same level - for whatever reason.

4. Dynasty rankings are (should be) based on where you would trade a player.

In the poll I mentioned above, MH and LE were too close to call. In my (4) dynasty leagues I can tell you one thing with certainty. No one would trade you Evans straight up for Harrison. In this case it would probably take a relatively decent 1st round rookie pick on top of MH to get that deal done. In our first year or so, I may have been able to get Evans plus, now the 1st may not cut it.

5. We are not NFL scouts.

Some guys are good at evaluating football talent, but they all get paid for it. If we are smart we read as much of their stuff as we can, and watch the player to correlate performance and hype. When everything jives then we can move on to

6. Get the studs.

There are rare talents that enter the NFL. Guys that are universally seen as sure things and a cut above just about everyone else. Get them on your roster because this is your best hope at having a great dynasty team. Sure, you won't be able to get them all, and much of our success comes from picking up guys like Colston off waivers. But...

I would not trade you the aforementioned Evans for Colston. I know he was ranked a good bit higher then LE in that same poll, but you would have to pry him away from my bleeding hands with a much better offer then Colston. Am I crazy? Probably, but here's the thing. Colston was a 7th round pick for a reason. He may go on to the HOF for all I know, but using #5 above, I know one thing for certain: Lee Evans is a stud. He may be devalued right now because of his team, and he may end up having an inferior career. I don't know, but neither do you. Pedigree combined with our own eyes is about as powerful a combination as you can get. Throw in some actual performance and Viola, a keeper.

What about a guy like Fitz? Forgettaboutit!

I grow weary and disoriented. Hopefully this all makes some sense, but I'm going to have to leave some stuff on the table...

 

[Keg]

IMO, So much is based on situation...and ALG hit it on the head about PERCEPTION..."Perception is reality" is a fav saying of mine...below is the link to the OP from the IDP Forum and I also quoted the first post for those that dont like to click on links...its pretty damn long but I think its pretty in depth to give my insight as to reasoning and values...

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...=279423&hl=

This is not an advice thread, just my account of how I am rebuilding my team.

IT IS VERY LONG but I tried to give as much insight as to what I was doing as possible. If you have any comments good or bad thats fine. If you could care less then move along. My intent is to share how I am handling a rebuild and if that can help someone either from learning from something i did well or learning from a mistake then thats great...Now on to the rebuild!

Well my favorite league is a 16 team IDP Dynasty league with 35 rosters and 12 player Rookie Taxi Squads

it is also a contract league, we get $50/yr every year after RFA and the money can carry over.

Starting requirements: 1QB, 1RB, 2WR, 1TE, 2Flex(RB,WR,TE), 1K, 2-3DL, 2-3LB, 2-3DB(tot. 8 def starters)

tackles 2pts, assists 1pt, sacks 2pts, int2pts, PD1.5pts, offensive scoring is perfor with ppr...

History:

2003 was the leagues first year and my first draft pick was:

Corey Dillon at 1.13 followed by William Green at 2.4

I went on to win my Division in year 1 but got bounced in the playoffs mainly because of a monster game by Portis

2004 & 2005 my team was besieged with injuries

2006 I decided its time to rebuild...i sorta tried to retool in 05 and got hammered with injuries and was gonna retool in 06 but decided to do a complete and total tear down and rebuild from the ground up:

This is what my last starting lineup of 2005 looked like:

contract length is what it was after the last game.

Hasslebeck(1)

Dillon(RFA)

Holt(2), Kennison(1), Ward(RFA), Glenn(RFA)

LJ Smith(5)

Kaeding(3)

Strahan(RFA), JHenderson(RFA)

Pierce(6), Bockwoldt(3),MarkBrown(1)

STaylor(8),Chavous(1), THolt(RFA)

also note that Ray Ray(2) & Winslow(8) were both on IR



My DTS at the end of last yr looked like this:

Mauck, Pickett, VanPelt, Seneca Wallace

Shaud Williams, Quincy Wilson

McCune, Jared Newberry

Josh Bullocks, Considine, Rashad Washington, Fabian Washington



Here is a list of some notable players that will be availabe in RFA this coming year:

QBs: Hasslebeck, Brees & Delhomme

RBs: Tiki, Edge, Thomas Jones, Barlow, Betts & Rhodes

WRs: Chad Johnson, Boldin, DJax, Plaxico, Bryant, Kennison, Galloway & Bruce

TEs: Heap, Shockey & Gonzo(we can start 2 TEs and they get 1ppr everyone else gets .5/recp)

DLs: Osi, Suggs, JTaylor, Burgess, Freeney, Kapmann, Mathis & Kevin Williams

LBs: Bulluck, Witherspoon, MPeterson, Briggs, Fletcher, ZachT, June, DEdwards, PisaT, LMarshall, Crowell & Brooks

DBs: Adrian Wilson, Rhonde, Polamalu

I currently have the most money to spend in RFA and will give each teams totals at the very end.

so here is a chronicle of the rebuild...I will refer to my team as TEAM R(for rebuild)

contracts will be listed (x) after players names

1st deal was back in March:

Trade 1

TEAM R gave up Lewis, Ray BAL LB(2)

Team Left Coast gave up Ulbrich, Jeff SFO LB(2); Rook pick 8.11

& $9

back in march i was leary of Ray being able to return to his former self and conversely expected big things from Ulbrich this year(boy was I wrong)...I figured if Ulbrich really blew up I would be able to deal him for good value or with at least have a decent LB the following year...cash was because I was going to target Lamont Jordan in RFA...overall I think I lost on this deal and would have gotten much more for Ray Ray now vs then...but it was a piece of the puzzle that lead me to decide to do the complete tear down.

after the Ray Ray trade I started to look long and hard at my team and what I saw was a bunch of guys with one year contracts and some talented RFAs....so I i pondered do i make a move in this years RFA and try for a one year run at the title again(that didnt work so well last yr) or do I go into rebuild mode...it wasnt an easy decision but with only Corey Dillon(RFA) as my only RB my future didnt look bright so the rebuild was on...i started shopping everyone on my roster and the following are trades that took place...at the end I will post what my team looks like now...

Trade 2

TEAM R gave up the RIGHTS to Strahan, Michael NYG DE(RFA)

Team Coffee sends $4.

Strahan was an RFA(restricted free agent, owner has matching rights) and his age didnt fit with my rebuild so I figured I would deal him for some cash for future aquisitions

Trade 3

TEAM R gave up RIGHTS to Ward, Hines PIT WR(RFA)

Team Dawgs gave up $7

Note that Ward was anohter RFA and I really didnt like the pitt offense going forward and figured Ward would cost to much to keep in RFA, getting $7 for his rights was a very nice deal

Trade 4

TEAM R gave up Kennison, Eddie KCC WR(1)

Team Crush gave up Rook pick 2.13, Rook pick 4.14

& $5

Kennison was on a one year deal so I figured I should get as much value out of him as I can because I figured that a decline was very possible this yr, so I looked for a team that was weak at WR but looking to challenge for their div title.

Trade 5

TEAM R gave up Hasselbeck, Matt SEA QB(1)

Team Left Coast gave up Rook pick 1.11 and 3.11

& $3

Well considering Hasslebeck was my only starting QB, I was now at the point of no return. Could I have gotten more cash in the deal? Probably but overall I was pretty happy with the deal and 1.11 was used to help me move up and aquire AJ Hawk in our Rook Draft.

Trade 6

TEAM R gave up Dillon, Corey NEP RB(RFA);Holt, Torry STL WR(2);Henderson, John JAC DT(RFA)

Team Relocate gave up Engram, Bobby SEA WR(1)

Rook picks 1.1 and 3.1

The deal that netted me my RB of the future REGGIE BUSH...I was one of the guys that passed on LT for Bennett(different league) a few years ago...I wasnt a complete Bush disciple but I couldnt pass on him like i did on LT. It wasnt easy to deal Holt and his 2 yr contract(only he and Ray Ray had more then a 1yr contract in all my deals)

Trade 7

TEAM R gave up RIGHTS to Glenn, Terry DAL WR(RFA)

Team Coffee sends $2.

another RFA WR that didn't fit into my rebuild so getting something was better then letting him walk in RFA

Trade 8

TEAM R gave up Faulk, Marshall STL RB(1)

Team Midget sends $7

Well in his defense he owned SJAX and with me rebuilding he was the odds on fav to win our div and it was prior to any real bad news on marshall...i made out like a bandit on this deal

Trade 9

TEAM R gave up Engram, Bobby SEA WR(1)

Team Chef Boyardee gave up Moore, Clarence BAL WR(1) or DTS I cant remember

& $2

Engram wasnt gonna help me this yr, and i probably could have gotten more if i had waited until there was major worries about DJax knee.

Trade 10

TEAM R gave up rook pick 1.07 & 1.11

Team Midget gave up rook pick 1.04; 2007 Round 5 Draft Pick

I worked this trade and the next trade at the same time...i really wanted Hawk and was afraid he would go at 1.6...so all by itself i dont like this deal much but coupled with the next deal I think it worked out for me. However, in hindsight I would probably have passed on the next deal and taken maroney at 1.4

Trade 11

TEAM R gave up rook pick 1.04 & rook pick 3.01

Team Bourbon gave up rook pick 1.06; rook pick 1.16; rook pick 2.06; rook pick 5.06

pretty much summed up how i felt about this deal above...they were tied together and I wouldnt have agreed to one without having the other lined up.

Trade 12

TEAM Rgave up rook pick 4.14 & 4.16

Team Tasty Cakes gave up rook pick 3.13

This trade was all about getting Derek Hagan, who I see being a very good #2 WR in MIA in a year or 2.

Trade 13

TEAM R gave up Haynes, Verron PIT RB(2), 2007 Round 3 Draft Pick

Team Crush gave up rook pick 3.14

Basically I was working trade 12 and 13 at the same time because I wanted 2 specific players Derek Hagan and Thomas Howard...also fwiw the Crush owner has FWP

Trade 14

TEAM R gave up McCune, Robert FA LB(DTS);Considine, Sean PHI S(DTS)

Team Bourbon gave up $3

This deal took place right before final roster declaration and I was going to cut both players from my DTS so getting $3 was worth it...in hindsight I kinda wish i had given considine a contract to see how he turns out...but DB is always deep so no worries.

Trade 15

TEAM R gave up Cundiff, Billy FA PK(1)

Team Clinton gives $1

Well cundiff was my 3rd kicker at the time and another team needed a 2nd kicker so I sold him for a buck and it was of course before he was cut by the pack.

Trade 16

TEAM R gave up $10

Team Clinton gave up RIGHTS to Chambers, Chris MIA WR(RFA)

2007 3rd and 2007 5th rook picks

This deal sorta came back to bite me in the butt for a bit, I basically wanted chambers as a building block for my recvrs and figured that if i owned his rights i would just be able to match the current high bid and be done..but we have a special rule that allowed the high bidder to up his bid... and he upped it to $28...now I am pretty heavily invested in Chambers so I couldnt let him walk and yet I didnt want to spend that much on him...so i matched and then started shopping him right after RFA finished up

Trade 17

TEAM R gave up Jackson, Tarvaris MIN QB(DTS)

Team Coffee gave up Croyle, Brodie KCC QB(DTS); Year 2007 Round 6 Rook Pick

& $3

I really like TJax upside but he is raw and I think Croyle has just as good an opportunity in front of him in KC, plus i get more money and a draft pick...whats not to like(lots if TJax pans out and Croyle doesnt, but my fingers are crossed)...add to that team coffee is a vikes fan

Trade 18

TEAM R gave up Burleson, Nate SEA WR(1);Chambers, Chris MIA WR(OPEN);Robinson, Koren GBP WR(1)

Team Clinton gave up Chatman, Antonio CIN WR;Davis, Andre' BUF WR;Johnson, Kevin FA WR

& $54

Well as I stated earlier I was gonna shop Chambers after RFA and for a bit I thought i was gonna have to keep him(remember I wasnt happy with what his cost was to me)...but then the team that initially gave up on him in RFA opened his wallet, and he did so in a big big way...to the tune of $54(we only get $50/yr). I didnt expect anything much at all from the dead weight WRs i got(but i did think Davis could have some value in Buff, looks like i was wrong)...all in all I am VERY happy with this deal.

Trade 19

TEAM Rgave up Year 2007 Round 8 Rook Pick

Team Coffee gave up Gregg, Kelly BAL DT(1)

I needed to add a DL to my team for the year and was looking to add one without spending any cash on the wire. I didnt expect much from Gregg but he has been a nice player this yr.

Trade 20

TEAM R gave up Smith, L.J. PHI TE(5)

Team Coffee gave up Jackson, Vincent SDC WR(DTS);Scobee, Josh JAC PK(4);Kiwanuka, Mathias NYG DE(DTS); Year 2007 Round 3 Rook Pick, 2007 Round 5 Draft Pick

I hated giving up LJ Smith, I have been one of his biggest proponents the past 2 yrs, but my other WR is winslow who has an 8yr contract so i felt i had the ability to deal LJ Smith. What I loved was getting another WR that I think will be a beast in a year or so in Vincent Jackson then you have the upside of KIWI at DL(Jared Allen already on my roster) and a couple of extra picks. IMO a very nice deal, but it was good for both parties.

Trade 21

TEAM R gave up Pierce, Antonio NYG LB(6)

Team Goat Humper gave up Year 2007 Round 1 Rook Pick; Year 2007 Round 2 Rook Pick

& $25

This deal was also a hard one to do because Pierce is one of my favorite players but a team that is rebuilding finds it very hard to turn down a 1st and 2nd and $25. The team that got pierce really needed him, his team is anchored on offense by LT and ALexander yet he has never made the playoffs in this league, pierce seemed to be a piece that could help him get over that hump. This trade was pre-injury to Alexander.

Trade 22

TEAM R gave up Becht, Anthony TBB TE(1);Thornton, David TEN LB(1);Chavous, Corey STL S(1); Year 2007 Round 4 Rook Pick

Team Relocate gave up Wilson, Cedrick PIT WR(1);Arrington, Lavar NYG LB(2);Surtain, Patrick KCC CB(1)

& $12

Well thorton was playing so well I decided with bye weeks it was a good time to shop him, the team that dealt for him is 4-1(never made the playoffs before) and had some issues with the bye at LB & TE. He also happens to be playing another 4-1 team and one of them could end up winning the wild card leaving the other on the outside looking in. For me it was about the cash! The players i got were more to make the contracts work on his side more then anything else.

Trade 23

TEAM R gave up RGould (1)

Team Toke gave up JHanson (1) and $1

I already have NKaeding (3) and JScobee(4) under contract at the kicking position, i wanted to try and get some money for gould....i sent a PM to this owner, I accidentally typed in Hanson and $1 when I meant to type $2, but he resonded he would take the deal so I honored it...i knew at that point I was also going to try and turn hanson into $1 to net $2 on what would have been a player I would have let go for NOTHING in RFA

Trade 24

TEAM R gave up JHanson (1)

Team Midget gave up $1

There I was able to net $2 from my 3rd kicker position that would have just walked away in RFA(i wouldnt have wasted a dime to match a 3rd kicker with the needs i have)

Trade 25

TEAM R gave up KGregg (1)

Team Midget gave up BPoppinga (1yr) & $1

I was able to land a starting LB to help cover a bye issue as well as bank an extra $1 for a DL that is a having a banner year, DL are like TEs for the most part but getting something for him was better then nothing...I highly doubt I would have matched him in RFA this upcoming year if I didnt deal him

Trade 26

TEAM R gave up AJ Hawk(DTS) Jon Alston(DTS)

Team Coffee gave up Jason Campbell(DTS), Abdul Hodge(DTS), JJ Arrington(5)

6th round rook pick in 2007 & $2

One of the reasons i never assigned Hawk a contract was i figured if an opportunity presented itself to trade him to a contending team the contract I assigned would possibly limit my trade partners. Sure enough a contender will lose Merriman for 4 games(pending the appeal)...and in return i did take on some risk, Campbell isnt guaranteed to be the heir but with nothing at QB yet I figured specualtion on him was worth it, if he is the heir having Al Saunders as an OC isnt a bad thing and Washington does have some very nice offensive weapons. In Hodge there is the chance he lands on the Strong Side next yr but my money is that Barnett leaves GB and hodge will inherit a ver productive MLB spot. The 6th rounder and cash were to help offset some of the risk that I did take on. This is either going to be a deal i look back on very fondly or one that will make me question myself for a long time. However, considering the quality LBs that will be available in RFA I figured this deal is worth the risk. The JJ Arrington part of it was to make the deal work contract wise, but it seems that JJ may not have been the problem in Zona and Edge isnt getting any younger. If JJ turns into anything at all its pure gravy.

Trade 27

TEAM R gave up 7th round rook pick in 2007

Team Bourbon gave up Rod Gardner (1)

I lost clarence moore when he was cut by balt. Actually he was inactive for every week except 2 and I didnt realize that. At least Gardner is an active player that sees the field. This move was just to help me field an active lineup. I considered keeping the draft pick and activating Derek Hagan but reassesed that and didnt think that would be wise with the disaray that Miami is in right now.

Trade 28

TEAM R gave up: Kellen Winslow(8), Kiwanuka(4) & Shaun Williams(2)

Team Clinton gave up: Carnell Williams(5), Courtney Anderson(2), Ryan Pickett(1)

Stephen Cooper(3), Matt Wilhelm(3), Michael Lewis(4)

I found it pretty hard to give up Winslow thus leaving me with virtually nothing at TE(CAnderson) but with Bush on my DTS and staring 1.1 or 1.2 in the face i wasnt able to pass up on Caddy. Caddy is having a bad year but the entire bucs offense is in disarray and next yr the oline should be better and hopefully so is Caddy. Caddy Bush and 1.1 or 1.2 is going to give me 3 very nice young RBs to continue this build around.

Also think I may have landed the next LB to take over for Donnie Edwards in SD in Cooper or Wilhelm and

hopefully Michael Lewis ends up with another team next year and is a starter at SS(I think he will be).

WAIVER WIRE PICKUPS

Justin Fargas(2) $1

RandelEl(1) $1

Caleb Miller(1) $1

OK to help digest all that, if it was one huge trade it would look like this:

So when all is said and done I got the following:

$103net(recd 141 but sent 10 to Team Clinton, matched chambers at $28)

1.1, 1.6, 1.11, 2.6, 2.13, 3.11, 3.14, 5.6, 8.11

the following 2007 draft picks: 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, 5th, 5th, 6th

Croyle(DTS)

Carnell Williams(5), JJ Arrington(5)

VJackson(DTS), CWilson 1yr, CMoore(DTS,I think), AChatman 1yr, ADavis 1yr, Kevin Johnson 1yr, RGardner 1yr

Courtney Anderson(2)

Scobee 4yrs

Pickett(1)

Ulbrich 2yrs(who i had very high hopes for ), LArrington 2yrs Poppinga 1yr, Wilhelm(3), Cooper(3)

Surtain 1yr MLewis(4)

What did I give up?

1.4, 1.7, 1.11, 3.1, 4.14, 4.16

3rd, 4th 7th and 8th round picks in 2007

Hasslebeck 1yr, Tavaris Jackson(DTS)

Dillon(RFA), Haynes 2yrs, MFaulk 1yr

Holt 2yrs, Kennison 1yr, Glenn(RFA), Ward(RFA), Chambers(OPEN), Krob 1yr, Burleson 1yr, Engram 1yr

LJ Smith 5yrs, Becht 1yr KWinslow(8)

Cundiff 1yr or open cant remember(but he did get cut) Gould(1) Hanson(1)

JHenderson(RFA), Strahan(RFA) KGregg 1yr Kiwi(4)

Pierce 6yrs, Ray Ray 2yrs, Thornton 1yr, McCune(DTS) AJ Hawk(DTS) JAlston(DTS)

Chavous 1yr, Considine(DTS) SWilliams(2)

So now what does my team look like today?

Nall(3), Seneca Wallace(2), Mike McMahon(1)

Caddy(5), KFaulk(1), Shaud Williams(1), PPass(1) JJ Arrington (5), JFargas(2-WWpickup)

Sinorice Moss(6),CWilson(1), CMoore(1),AChatman(1),ADavis(1) RGardner(1), RandelEl(1-WWpickup)

CAnderson(2)

Kaeding(3), Scobee(4),

JaredAllen(2), Pickett(1), Stroud(2),

Wilhelm(3), Cooper(3) Arrington(2), Bockwoldt(3) Ulbrich(2) Poppinga(1), CalebMiller(1-WWpickup)

STaylor(8), JoshBullocks(3),MLewis(4), Demps(2), Surtain(1), Cedrick Griffin(3)

Chad Greenway is on IR with a 5yr Contract

My DTS:

KClemens, Croyle

Jason Campbell

Reggie Bush

Vincent Jackson, DHagan, Demitrius Williams, JWebb

THoward, AHodge, Gaither, Jamar Williams

Ok now remember this group of upcoming RFA players:



Here is a list of some notable players that will be availabe in RFA this coming year:

QBs: Hasslebeck, Brees & Delhomme

RBs: Tiki, Edge, Thomas Jones, Barlow, Betts & Rhodes

WRs: Chad Johnson, Boldin, DJax, Plaxico, Bryant, Kennison, Galloway & Bruce

TEs: Heap, Shockey & Gonzo(we can start 2 TEs and they get 1ppr everyone else gets .5/recp)

DLs: Osi, Suggs, JTaylor, Burgess, Freeney, Kapmann, Mathis & Kevin Williams

LBs: Bulluck, Witherspoon, MPeterson, Briggs, Fletcher, ZachT, June, DEdwards, PisaT, LMarshall, Crowell & Brooks

DBs: Adrian Wilson, Rhonde, Polamalu

Here is a listing of what teams have for cash as of today(10/25/2006)and we wont get anymore cash until after RFA 2007. So if somone wants more cash they have to trade to get it from someone else:

I have $205(23% of the league money)

My divison mates have: $62, $48 & $36

The other div in my conf has: $55*, $42, $17, $9**

*Owns bullock, spoon, shockey and brees

** has no notable RFAs and a very very good team(SB favorite imo)

The other Conf has:

Div A

$110*, $69**, $45, $34

*owns Hasslebeck & TSuggs

** owns Edge, Delhomme & Boldin

Div B

$45, $45, $35, $28

as a whole there is currently: $885 of which I own 22.6%

I think that with the amount of money that I have along with my current DTS and the

draft picks I have next year(2-1sts, 2-2nds, 2-3rds, 4-5ths, 2-6ths & a 7th) that I should be able to

turn this team around rather quickly...If I am really fortunate maybe even contend for a playoff spot

next year.

Currently I do sit as the worst team in the league but believe it or not I won my 1st game of the season(that team is currently in 1st place in our division) and that was because another team finally won its first game of the season this past week. More then likely I am looking at a top3 pick but could easily be as low as 1.5 or as high as 1.1...only time will tell...until then this year will absolutely kill me but I cant wait for next RFA and Rookie Draft...I will have to come back and give an update after RFA and then the Rook draft next yr.

2006 End of Season Roster:

CSimms(4),SWallace(2),Nall(3),McMahon(1)

Caddy(5),JJArington(5), Fargas(2),KFaulk(1),Pass(1),ShaudWilliams(1)

SinoriceMoss(6),RandelEl(1),CWilson(1)CMoore(1),

RGardner(1),ADavis(1),AChatman(1)

CourtneyAnderson(2)

Kaeding(3),Scobee(4)

JaredAllen(2),Stoud(2),Pickett(1)

CGreenway(5)SCooper(3),Wilhelm(3),CalebMiller(1),Ulbrich(2),

Bockwoldt(3),Poppinga(1),LArrington(2)

SeanTaylor(8),JBullocks(3),MichaelLewis(4),CedricGriffin(3),Demps(2),Surtain(1)

DTS:

Jason Campbell, KClemens, BCroyle

REGGIE BUSH

Vincent Jackson, DHagan, Dem.Williams,JWebb

THoward, OGaither, Abdul Hodge, JamarWilliams

UPDATES:

12/12/06 My team finished tied with another team at 2-11

but due to having scored fewer points I will draft 1.1

12/12/06: Current Cash Level $201(23%) of $870

Thoughts:

QB:

I feel much better about at least having a starting QB next yr in Jason Campbell(I think he has earned the FT Gig next yr)...but I will also most likely go hard after Drew Brees in RFA

RB:

Bush while not showing much ability to run btwn the tackles is ranked as the #8 RB in this league after week 14 so he will be a viable starter for my squad next year. Hopefully Caddy is able to bounce back next year and be a serviceable #2 RB with #1 upside. 1.1 is most likely going to be Adrian Peterson but there is still a ton that could happen btwn now and the draft. However, whats not to like about a young starting backfield of: Reggie Bush, Carnell Williams & Adrian Peterson in a dynasty league?

WR:

If I am able to run out 3 RBs then I will only need to mine 2 starters at WR and with Chad Johnson and Boldin both avail in RFA I am going to be targeting one if not both of them(the boldin owner does have the 3rd most cash though)...and I still like the prospects of Vjax and DHagan too...would like to see Sinorice show something over the last few weeks too but WR should be an area I can improve greatly for next year.

K: got 2 good ones that are both young

DL: Jared Allen will be the anchor but after that I will be fishing in the rook draft and RFA for a 2nd viable starter.

LB: I like the prospects I have in Wilhelm/Cooper if/when Edwards leaves SD...and Thomas Howard posted double digit scoring every week but one in my scoring system and then there is gaither who is starting to show his value in philly and hodge who will hopefully get a shot to play MLB in GB next yr. Couple that with the likes of Bullock, Witherspoon, Briggs, Thomas, Peterson, Flethcer-Baker, June all being RFA I should be able to assemble a very good LBing crew.

DB:Sean Taylor and that stupid 8 yr contract I gave him is at least starting to pay off(ranked #13 thru 14 weeks), Cedric Griffin seems like he is going to be a player too and JBullocks has shown flashes but considering that DB is always so deep and avail via waivers I dont really have any major concerns for DB going forward.

My wish list for our RFA period in April:

1QB(Brees)

1-2WR(hopefully one of CJ or Boldin)

1DL

2-LBs(any combo of these guys would be great: Bullock, Spoon, Briggs,Peterson, June,Fletcher-Baker)

Now just to enjoy the rest of the NFL season and wait for the trading period to open back up after the Super Bowl.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Wannabee is the Ron Wolf of Dynasty League FF. Pure Genius.

Wannabee knows stuff. I love the perceived value angle, and play it up often.Now is the time to start thinking of selling draft picks, with their peak right between the Combine and the Draft.

 

[wannabee]

7. I think this would be very easy if each of us had our rankings public. We could then look at where that owner has a particular player ranked so we could know (within a variance) what they would pay for a player or what it would take for a player just by looking at the players above and below in the rankings.

This is an interesting idea. I wonder what the result would be if I did this in my leagues?I assume owners would use my ranking to try to sell players to me I am higher on than they are. I know that is what I would do with thier rankings. But thier knowing that I think I would lose my chance or at least part of my chance to get those players cheaper than I value them. I would also look at which players I felt were too low and try to buy them but if they know how much I value that player how could I get that player at a low value?I am not shooting down this idea down. I have never tried it before. I am just questioning if it would bring the desired result or not. Have you or has anyone else done this before? And what did it lead to?

Not that I think it is viable, but that would be the best way to gain value on fellow owners. Just ask Jeff Pasquino. He is at a disadvantage. I would look at his FBG dynasty rankings and offer him trades, and he would say, "quit using my rankings against me". It was funny. At one point, he had Ahman Green ahead of Maurice Drew, so I offered Green + a low pick for Drew. He rejected. But, the caveat is that those rankings are generic and would change some depending on the makeup of yor team ... and depends on scoring system.Thanks for starting this thread and keeping it going.

 

[wannabee]

Wannabee is the Ron Wolf of Dynasty League FF. Pure Genius.

Wannabee knows stuff. I love the perceived value angle, and play it up often.Now is the time to start thinking of selling draft picks, with their peak right between the Combine and the Draft.

Thank you Jeff and Pauli. Wolf and I hail from the same area oddly enough.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Not that I think it is viable, but that would be the best way to gain value on fellow owners. Just ask Jeff Pasquino. He is at a disadvantage. I would look at his FBG dynasty rankings and offer him trades, and he would say, "quit using my rankings against me". It was funny. At one point, he had Ahman Green ahead of Maurice Drew, so I offered Green + a low pick for Drew. He rejected. But, the caveat is that those rankings are generic and would change some depending on the makeup of yor team ... and depends on scoring system.

 

[wannabee]

Sorry to have so many posts in a row. But, I would like to offer a couple more situations to look at:

a. Players that either underperformed or were injured that could be huge the following year. I will offer a few names that were severely impacted this year and whose value could go up exponentially in a few months or for next season. I will throw out the names of: Boldin (change of QB and having rook QB), Gates (new QB), Reggie Brown (depending on if Stallworth signs back in Philly), and one more DJax

b. I look to trade for WRs coming off the rookie year if they show flashes of greatness, but are still unknown or not a part of the offense much. A rook WR takes so long to get going, most owners give up early. A couple examples are Demetrius Williams (who still has less than 20 catches) and Derek Hagan (who showed promised but had a bad case of dropsies).

c. One last one. Sometimes, I will look for the undervalued RB in a situation where a team uses two RBs. Thomas Jones, Deuce, and Dillon come to mind. They produce very well and are pretty cheap compared to their production. Two other choices for this coming year would be Travis Henry and Betts. Most people will think White is worth more as the heir apparent, but Henry is playing well and very cheap. Ladell Betts, with Portis around, should be very cheap. But, we have now seen how well Betts can play if Portis is injured. And, with the amount of carries Portis has had, future injuries are possible.

 

[dirtyhalos]

Not that I think it is viable, but that would be the best way to gain value on fellow owners. Just ask Jeff Pasquino. He is at a disadvantage. I would look at his FBG dynasty rankings and offer him trades, and he would say, "quit using my rankings against me". It was funny. At one point, he had Ahman Green ahead of Maurice Drew, so I offered Green + a low pick for Drew. He rejected. But, the caveat is that those rankings are generic and would change some depending on the makeup of yor team ... and depends on scoring system.Thanks for starting this thread and keeping it going.

f'ing ....... i used this technique on bloom all year, i think he started adjusting his rankings to accomodate my offers, cheater

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Not that I think it is viable, but that would be the best way to gain value on fellow owners. Just ask Jeff Pasquino. He is at a disadvantage. I would look at his FBG dynasty rankings and offer him trades, and he would say, "quit using my rankings against me". It was funny. At one point, he had Ahman Green ahead of Maurice Drew, so I offered Green + a low pick for Drew. He rejected. But, the caveat is that those rankings are generic and would change some depending on the makeup of yor team ... and depends on scoring system.Thanks for starting this thread and keeping it going.

f'ing ....... i used this technique on bloom all year, i think he started adjusting his rankings to accomodate my offers, cheater

I'd never do that I might delay an update slightly though.....

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Try running a trader's column and doing deals. That really doesn't help.

 

[Biabreakable]

3. Perception is based on potential.After observing how some FBG owners operate (how they rank players and respond to position polls) I can honestly say that I wish my FFB compatriots shared such views. Naturally, every owner is different regarding specific players, but in general the 50/33/17 rule I have seen thrown around is, IMO, quite awful.

1st of alg I apprechiate your post and your points are well taken. In regards to the 3 year model and gheemoney's idea of giving a 50% weight to current year 33% to year 2 and 17% to year 3 I don't consider this to be a rule at all but rather an idea or way to weight rankings/projections.If you would elaborate on why you think it is awful I am all ears because I don't like to make assumptions and I am not really clear about what side of this idea you may be on.Part of your post made points about how player performance does not always follow a natural progression or decline but that it is more up and down. Which is certainly true however these peaks and valleys are ushualy caused by injuries to the player themselves or to supporting players on thier team.Lets look at Larry Fitzgerald for example:

+--------------------------+-------------------------+ | Rushing | Receiving |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| Year TM | G | Att Yards Y/A TD | Rec Yards Y/R TD |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| 2004 ari | 16 | 8 14 1.8 0 | 58 780 13.4 8 || 2005 ari | 16 | 8 41 5.1 0 | 103 1409 13.7 10 || 2006 ari | 11 | 1 5 5.0 0 | 60 815 13.6 4 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| TOTAL | 43 | 17 60 3.5 0 | 221 3004 13.6 22 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

Now the way I am reading his career so far is that he seem very consistent in terms of yards/receptions. His numbers took a big jump in his second season as a fast developing Wr as many people predicted he would be because of his history and college career. What has affected his numbers this season is missing time due to injury as well as having a rookie Qb. Yet if he had not missed time to injury he still appears to be on pace for 92 catches 1251 yards if he had played a full season. The TDs may have been down somthing I would associate more with playing with a rookie Qb/Edge/Shipp/injury. So a slight decline from 2005 which is to be expected because of the huge ammount of passes attempted by the Cardinals in that season.Despite his numbers fluctuating I don't really see a reason for expectations of his numbers moving forward to be up or down. I think he maintains the same value.The same cannot be said for every player but with many of them I think it does when you take into consideration the mitigating circumstances that have caused players performance to fluctuate. So from my perspective many players performance/value does follow a relativly predictable path as long as somthing does not dramaticly change thier role/situation with thier team. Things like coaching changes, free agency or debilitating injuries.Where I am not tracking with you is if you think player potential/value should have a longer view or a shorter view than the 50/33/17 idea. On one hand your saying that players are unpredictable long term which would lead me to think your expectations for player performance/value (not to be confused with percieved value) would be more immediate or short term. Such as only looking at the current year or a 2 year window. But on the other hand when your talking about comparing Marvin Harrison to Lee Evans and Evans being drasticly more valuable than Marvin is leads me to think your looking at a longer view. Perhaps longer than the 3 year window.I wonder more specificly about other peoples views on this as well. And what weighting they may have in mind regardless if they actualy apply it to real numbers or not. I know some people have a much longer view than 3 years in the way they value players. That is one of the main things imo that makes rookie Rbs who have not even proven themselves but have just shown potential to possibly be top Rbs so valuable. When the reality is a Rb performing at a high level for even a 3 year period of time is more an exception than a common trend.I am totaly with you on the perception of value issue in trading. I have seen all kinds of differing perspectives on this and do my best to exploit those perceptions when I discover them. That is similar to ADP issue of why pay 2nd round value for a player you know you can get in round 5? That would just be bad business.

 

[alg]

3. Perception is based on potential.After observing how some FBG owners operate (how they rank players and respond to position polls) I can honestly say that I wish my FFB compatriots shared such views. Naturally, every owner is different regarding specific players, but in general the 50/33/17 rule I have seen thrown around is, IMO, quite awful.

1st of alg I apprechiate your post and your points are well taken. In regards to the 3 year model and gheemoney's idea of giving a 50% weight to current year 33% to year 2 and 17% to year 3 I don't consider this to be a rule at all but rather an idea or way to weight rankings/projections.If you would elaborate on why you think it is awful I am all ears because I don't like to make assumptions and I am not really clear about what side of this idea you may be on.Part of your post made points about how player performance does not always follow a natural progression or decline but that it is more up and down. Which is certainly true however these peaks and valleys are ushualy caused by injuries to the player themselves or to supporting players on thier team.Lets look at Larry Fitzgerald for example:

+--------------------------+-------------------------+ | Rushing | Receiving |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| Year TM | G | Att Yards Y/A TD | Rec Yards Y/R TD |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| 2004 ari | 16 | 8 14 1.8 0 | 58 780 13.4 8 || 2005 ari | 16 | 8 41 5.1 0 | 103 1409 13.7 10 || 2006 ari | 11 | 1 5 5.0 0 | 60 815 13.6 4 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| TOTAL | 43 | 17 60 3.5 0 | 221 3004 13.6 22 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

Now the way I am reading his career so far is that he seem very consistent in terms of yards/receptions. His numbers took a big jump in his second season as a fast developing Wr as many people predicted he would be because of his history and college career. What has affected his numbers this season is missing time due to injury as well as having a rookie Qb. Yet if he had not missed time to injury he still appears to be on pace for 92 catches 1251 yards if he had played a full season. The TDs may have been down somthing I would associate more with playing with a rookie Qb/Edge/Shipp/injury. So a slight decline from 2005 which is to be expected because of the huge ammount of passes attempted by the Cardinals in that season.Despite his numbers fluctuating I don't really see a reason for expectations of his numbers moving forward to be up or down. I think he maintains the same value.The same cannot be said for every player but with many of them I think it does when you take into consideration the mitigating circumstances that have caused players performance to fluctuate. So from my perspective many players performance/value does follow a relativly predictable path as long as somthing does not dramaticly change thier role/situation with thier team. Things like coaching changes, free agency or debilitating injuries.Where I am not tracking with you is if you think player potential/value should have a longer view or a shorter view than the 50/33/17 idea. On one hand your saying that players are unpredictable long term which would lead me to think your expectations for player performance/value (not to be confused with percieved value) would be more immediate or short term. Such as only looking at the current year or a 2 year window. But on the other hand when your talking about comparing Marvin Harrison to Lee Evans and Evans being drasticly more valuable than Marvin is leads me to think your looking at a longer view. Perhaps longer than the 3 year window.I wonder more specificly about other peoples views on this as well. And what weighting they may have in mind regardless if they actualy apply it to real numbers or not. I know some people have a much longer view than 3 years in the way they value players. That is one of the main things imo that makes rookie Rbs who have not even proven themselves but have just shown potential to possibly be top Rbs so valuable. When the reality is a Rb performing at a high level for even a 3 year period of time is more an exception than a common trend.I am totaly with you on the perception of value issue in trading. I have seen all kinds of differing perspectives on this and do my best to exploit those perceptions when I discover them. That is similar to ADP issue of why pay 2nd round value for a player you know you can get in round 5? That would just be bad business.

I think the confusion with my argument comes from the concept of value. I will use the Harrison/ Evans comparison again to illustrate why I think a 50/33/17 or whatever short term formula is awful:We are analyzing approaches to DYNASTY value, not redraft of course. By definition we must use long term assessments. Maximizing value in this context means that, while Harrison could conceivably outperform Evans for the next 2-3 years (which I would contest by the way) within that time frame he would lose all or most value in trade. Theoretically he could have helped his owner perform better during the season/s held, but by the end of his window he would hold the trade value of a bag of rocks.Let me use another example. I remember an initial dynasty draft where Holmes was taken in the 1st, or high 2nd round. LJ was taken a round or 2 later. Holmes' value could be compared to the current Alexander situation - a RB at peak FFB productivity at or near 30. Everyone knew (sort of) that Holmes was the MAN. Yet no one could have been fooled about him being so for another 3-4 years. Yet he was a high draft pick, just as Alexander is right now. Those taking him reasoned that he would help them win now, or at least in the short timeframe alloted.And still his performance (or health) fell off the ledge faster then anticipated. I would argue that it didn't matter. As a participant in a dynasty (long term) league, that drafting him at all was making an enormous sacrifice of the future. I would also argue that in more times then not, such players rarely provide the performance expected. What is Holmes worth in a dynasty now? Even if he reclaimed his starting job next year?In short, I believe FFB guys make erroneous assessments based on past performance and regardless of age. In those drafts I would have traded down, picked up rookie picks and young players - someone like Fitz. Needless to say, the guy who took Holmes is a bottom feeder, and I may win the 2nd championship in a row.Is it that simple? Yes. I trade a lot, and fairly, and sometimes unsuccessfully. There are no idiots in my leagues. The difference is that my focus on quality youth has ensured one significant thing - the persistence of value. I have been able to consistently recycle players who retain some value for other more promising players, and not exhaust my capital. The guy who took Holmes, or in our other example, the guy picking Harrison, quickly finds that they no longer have the stored up value to continue replenishing their team. Their team got old before they suspected it, but in truth, it had already lost significant value as soon as they picked the more established 'sure thing.'There is no such thing as a sure thing. The best we can due is maximize the value of our rosters - and continuously - so that our team doesn't crash with the next ACL. The guy who takes Harrison will find out in two years that he gets nothing for him in trade. Meanwhile he can only dream about trading for an emerging star like Evans - he simply can't afford him. And that is true even if Evans gets no better then he is right now.

 

[EBF]

3. Perception is based on potential.After observing how some FBG owners operate (how they rank players and respond to position polls) I can honestly say that I wish my FFB compatriots shared such views. Naturally, every owner is different regarding specific players, but in general the 50/33/17 rule I have seen thrown around is, IMO, quite awful.

1st of alg I apprechiate your post and your points are well taken. In regards to the 3 year model and gheemoney's idea of giving a 50% weight to current year 33% to year 2 and 17% to year 3 I don't consider this to be a rule at all but rather an idea or way to weight rankings/projections.If you would elaborate on why you think it is awful I am all ears because I don't like to make assumptions and I am not really clear about what side of this idea you may be on.Part of your post made points about how player performance does not always follow a natural progression or decline but that it is more up and down. Which is certainly true however these peaks and valleys are ushualy caused by injuries to the player themselves or to supporting players on thier team.Lets look at Larry Fitzgerald for example:

+--------------------------+-------------------------+ | Rushing | Receiving |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| Year TM | G | Att Yards Y/A TD | Rec Yards Y/R TD |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| 2004 ari | 16 | 8 14 1.8 0 | 58 780 13.4 8 || 2005 ari | 16 | 8 41 5.1 0 | 103 1409 13.7 10 || 2006 ari | 11 | 1 5 5.0 0 | 60 815 13.6 4 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| TOTAL | 43 | 17 60 3.5 0 | 221 3004 13.6 22 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

Now the way I am reading his career so far is that he seem very consistent in terms of yards/receptions. His numbers took a big jump in his second season as a fast developing Wr as many people predicted he would be because of his history and college career. What has affected his numbers this season is missing time due to injury as well as having a rookie Qb. Yet if he had not missed time to injury he still appears to be on pace for 92 catches 1251 yards if he had played a full season. The TDs may have been down somthing I would associate more with playing with a rookie Qb/Edge/Shipp/injury. So a slight decline from 2005 which is to be expected because of the huge ammount of passes attempted by the Cardinals in that season.Despite his numbers fluctuating I don't really see a reason for expectations of his numbers moving forward to be up or down. I think he maintains the same value.The same cannot be said for every player but with many of them I think it does when you take into consideration the mitigating circumstances that have caused players performance to fluctuate. So from my perspective many players performance/value does follow a relativly predictable path as long as somthing does not dramaticly change thier role/situation with thier team. Things like coaching changes, free agency or debilitating injuries.Where I am not tracking with you is if you think player potential/value should have a longer view or a shorter view than the 50/33/17 idea. On one hand your saying that players are unpredictable long term which would lead me to think your expectations for player performance/value (not to be confused with percieved value) would be more immediate or short term. Such as only looking at the current year or a 2 year window. But on the other hand when your talking about comparing Marvin Harrison to Lee Evans and Evans being drasticly more valuable than Marvin is leads me to think your looking at a longer view. Perhaps longer than the 3 year window.I wonder more specificly about other peoples views on this as well. And what weighting they may have in mind regardless if they actualy apply it to real numbers or not. I know some people have a much longer view than 3 years in the way they value players. That is one of the main things imo that makes rookie Rbs who have not even proven themselves but have just shown potential to possibly be top Rbs so valuable. When the reality is a Rb performing at a high level for even a 3 year period of time is more an exception than a common trend.I am totaly with you on the perception of value issue in trading. I have seen all kinds of differing perspectives on this and do my best to exploit those perceptions when I discover them. That is similar to ADP issue of why pay 2nd round value for a player you know you can get in round 5? That would just be bad business.

I think the confusion with my argument comes from the concept of value. I will use the Harrison/ Evans comparison again to illustrate why I think a 50/33/17 or whatever short term formula is awful:We are analyzing approaches to DYNASTY value, not redraft of course. By definition we must use long term assessments. Maximizing value in this context means that, while Harrison could conceivably outperform Evans for the next 2-3 years (which I would contest by the way) within that time frame he would lose all or most value in trade. Theoretically he could have helped his owner perform better during the season/s held, but by the end of his window he would hold the trade value of a bag of rocks.Let me use another example. I remember an initial dynasty draft where Holmes was taken in the 1st, or high 2nd round. LJ was taken a round or 2 later. Holmes' value could be compared to the current Alexander situation - a RB at peak FFB productivity at or near 30. Everyone knew (sort of) that Holmes was the MAN. Yet no one could have been fooled about him being so for another 3-4 years. Yet he was a high draft pick, just as Alexander is right now. Those taking him reasoned that he would help them win now, or at least in the short timeframe alloted.And still his performance (or health) fell off the ledge faster then anticipated. I would argue that it didn't matter. As a participant in a dynasty (long term) league, that drafting him at all was making an enormous sacrifice of the future. I would also argue that in more times then not, such players rarely provide the performance expected. What is Holmes worth in a dynasty now? Even if he reclaimed his starting job next year?In short, I believe FFB guys make erroneous assessments based on past performance and regardless of age. In those drafts I would have traded down, picked up rookie picks and young players - someone like Fitz. Needless to say, the guy who took Holmes is a bottom feeder, and I may win the 2nd championship in a row.Is it that simple? Yes. I trade a lot, and fairly, and sometimes unsuccessfully. There are no idiots in my leagues. The difference is that my focus on quality youth has ensured one significant thing - the persistence of value. I have been able to consistently recycle players who retain some value for other more promising players, and not exhaust my capital. The guy who took Holmes, or in our other example, the guy picking Harrison, quickly finds that they no longer have the stored up value to continue replenishing their team. Their team got old before they suspected it, but in truth, it had already lost significant value as soon as they picked the more established 'sure thing.'There is no such thing as a sure thing. The best we can due is maximize the value of our rosters - and continuously - so that our team doesn't crash with the next ACL. The guy who takes Harrison will find out in two years that he gets nothing for him in trade. Meanwhile he can only dream about trading for an emerging star like Evans - he simply can't afford him. And that is true even if Evans gets no better then he is right now.

Nice post. I agree with a lot of what you said.I also think it might be a decent justification for going with a stud WR strategy in dynasty leagues. It seems like most top WRs have longer careers than most top RBs, so all talent considerations being equal, an investment in a 22 year old WR might be expected to pay for a longer period of time than an investment in a 22 year old RB. In a 12 team PPR dynasty that starts 1 RB, 1 WR, and 3 FLEX, I used my 1.03 pick on Reggie Bush. I used 6.01 on LenDale White. I didn't draft another RB until the late teen rounds. Why? Because RBs seem like more volatile investments. They rise quickly, but they also tend to fall quickly. Look at guys like Michael Bennett, William Green, Kevin Jones, Tatum Bell, and Julius Jones. They were all considered 1st-4th round FF picks at one point. Now? Who knows? The same fall from grace sometimes happens with WRs (Marcus Robinson, David Boston, Germane Crowell, Michael Clayton, etc.), but the fact remains that an elite WR has more staying power than an elite RB. As great as Emmitt Smith was, he still didn't last nearly as long as Jerry Rice. And for every Emmitt, there are lots of guys with a limited shelf life like Eddie George.The downside of the stud WR idea is that good RBs are typically a little tougher to come by than good WRs. A 2nd round rookie pick could've netted you a promising WR like Santonio Holmes, Greg Jennings, Derek Hagan, or Demetrius Williams, but unless Maurice Drew slipped in your league, you probably didn't have any truly viable RB prospects available in the same range. The high value of decent young RBs means it can be harder to replenish your RB ranks if you happen to suffer injuries. Unless you own an early pick, you'll probably have to swing a cdeal of some sort if you want to acquire a decent back. Nevertheless, I think an ideal initial draft strategy might be as follows:- Secure proven studs at QB, WR, and TE with your early picks. Don't worry too much about stockpiling RBs. Top priority should be getting solid stars in their prime. Think Chad Johnson, Antonio Gates, Anquan Boldin, Donovan McNabb, Carson Palmer, etc. You want the elite players in the league. Don't reach for a marginal RB over a star WR or QB. - Consider using one of your first three picks on a quality RB, but don't overpay because RBs tend to be overrated. Don't panic about loading up on RBs. Contrary to popular belief, good RBs always emerge from the mid-to-late rounds (Gore, MJD, Betts, etc.). - In the mid-to-late rounds, stock up on quality young back ups (Guys with a possible starting future. Guys like Chris Perry, Michael Turner, Cedric Benson, Ryan Moats, and LenDale White). Many of these players will ultimately pay dividends equal to those of expensive round 1-3 RBs, but are available for much cheaper.- Use your other mid-to-late picks on talented young players who haven't broken out yet. Think Matt Jones, Chad Jackson, Vernon Davis, Marcedes Lewis, Matt Schaub, Derek Hagan, and Santonio Holmes. Many of these players will bust, but a few of them will become top players. If you've done your job in the early rounds, they will round out your squad nicely and give you a very tough starting lineup 1-3 years down the road. Also, the good news with young players is that they carry value even if they disappoint. That's not the case with older guys. This general plan will give you a good foundation to work with at QB, TE, and WR, where it is typically tough to find a rookie contributor. If your team sucks, it's okay, because you stand a decent chance of drafting a rookie contributor with your early pick and you'll still have all your studs at the other positions. Also, your wealth of young talent will continue to mature, making your lineup stronger and giving you additional trading assets. This is similar to the plan that I used in the Hyperactive league. I missed the mark in year one and ended up bringing up the rear in my conference, but I'm looking okay for future seasons with a roster that includes (PPR) Reggie Bush, Larry Fitzgerald, Jeremy Shockey, Laveranues Coles, rookie pick 1.01, and a host of developing guys like Santonio Holmes, Bernard Berrian, Matt Jones, Alex Smith (QB), and LenDale White.

 

[Biabreakable]

alg,

Thanks for clarifying your position on this and once again a very good post and you make some good points for anyone to take into consideration.

I also have seen owners who invest in players with short shelf lives expecting the immediate reward from those proven but obviously short term players thinking win now and let following years be a problem to address when that time comes.

What I have seen most commonly with these owners is that they end up abandoning thier teams when thier best players fall apart. They may have tried to trade these veterans for younger players when they see those players usefullness begining to disappear but they cannot get reasonable value in trade for them so they end up being stuck with them.

I think every player reaches a point in thier career that you cannot get fair value in return for them. This can happen very quickly and once it does as an owner you realise that the best value you can get from that player is in keeping them and hoping they can still be startable for you while you wait for the bottom to fall out.

This is not neccessarily the end of the world to hold a player until the decline and eventualy retire/are cut as long as you have suitable replacements to take over. However I do agree with what you said that it is not the best use of your resources.

Going back to the value by years issue. I am going to have to guess again but from what I understand your taking a longer view or a differing view than the 50/33/17 idea. You said this gives to much weight to the current season. 50%.

This makes me wonder if we are speaking the same language here as I am not viewing this as me expecting a decline in value on a player in year 2 and then year 3 and I didn't interpet that to be gheemoneys meaning behind this either. But rather having a focus that is not going to assume too much about a player maintaining thier performance in following years so that I would ignore the value they offer me in the here and now. As you an many others have allready said things can change very quickly in the NFL and putting too much stock in potential can be just as detrimtal as hanging on to past performance too long.

By putting more emphasis on the value of a player for the current season does not preclude them from being a player who can maintain thier performance long term or even improve on it. After the 1st year is complete you re-evaluate the player and situation and make a new assesment based on the current season and once again pushing that out for 2 following years. If you are seeing a decline coming up ahead it is still being considered in your total value on the player. If that decline is in the following year or in year 3 then it does not have as much weight as the current season does. You can always chose to move the player at trade deadline this year or the following year and get out before the drop comes. Otherwise your running the risk I think of selling too soon. Or paying too much based on unrealised potential.

So (and I am guessing again but) perhaps you are representing another perspective that is more like 33/33/33 ?? A system that is looking for players to hopefully without other mitigating circumstances maintain thier value long term or improve on it. Or perhaps your looking longer term than 3 years?

I have been playing dynasty for over a decade now in different rule systems and formats. The place I have come to is using a 3 year window where my goal is for all my players to be able to maintain or improve on thier value for 3 years. So as players reach a point of age where they have not nessesarily begun to decline yet.. but that time is drawing near.. I tend to move them for younger players even when that player is still performing at a high level.

A general guideline would be Rbs when they reach age 29 Tes age 30 Qbs and Wrs age 32 for cutoffs based on what I have seen for when the majority of players at these positions will decline. Keeping in mind that these numbers are one year ahead of when the majority of them decline and ushualy I can still get good value in return for them as owners are not scared off because of thier age yet. Sometimes those players still go on to have 3 productive seasons without a significant decline. But if I got reasonable value in return this is still acceptable for me. I have lost nothing. After 2 or 3 more years I can then trade that player again for someone younger and continue the proccess.

That being said recent history has shown that players are lasting longer at a high level such as Curtis Martin Warrick Dunn Tiki Barber Marvin Harrison Brett Favre. People have been expecting players like Marvin to decline for several years now yet he keeps on performing at a high level. He is 35 now.. I don't know that he will be able to keep going much longer. But people thought the same thing about him 3 years ago.

Theres somthing to be said for having good proven veterans in stable situations on your team. They are very reliable contributors until the wheels fall off and might have a greater shelf life than you think with the new medicine training and rehabilitation available in our modern age.

Paying a low price on a cheap veteran that can help you for a year can be a bargain that helps your lineup and if you bought cheap you likely can sell cheap once your done with them as well and still not lose much if anything.

 

[alg]

Bia -

My issue with the 3 year window is related to the aging player and nothing more. The poll where some of the participants where mystified by Harrison not being as or more valuable then Evans serves as an excellent example. Well, maybe something more. Blue chip studs, regardless of early performance, will retain their value for quite awhile. Roy Williams didn't perform to Fitz's level early on, but no one threw him on the scrap heap either. Even in Detroit RW's value will persist. If they turn things around then the owner's value will have a huge up-tic.

I would also suggest that there is a place for the Martins and Harrisons of the world, but only when an owner gets the deep age discount. At that point they can bring great value to a roster, and probably as a starter. Think players like Issac Bruce, who continually out performs their redraft ADP. He can be had in a dynasty for pretty much the price of dirt. The key thing is, the owners who picked Harrison and Holmes a couple years ago in the 1st or 2nd round have destroyed their roster unless they made adequate provisions.

EBF -

I am right there with you on the WR issue. As you stated, WRs have a much longer shelf life, and RBs can and do burst on the scenes only to disappear just as quickly. In the drafts a few years back I was also the guy taking Fitz, and passing on Kevan Jones and S Jackson. SJ is looking good for sure, but in a dynasty format I would not trade Fitz for him straight up. Too often RBs begin to look like the flavor of the moment.

In a similar format to the one you describe (plus IDP) I have guys like Benson and Caddy on my bench right now. I had expected more at this point, and was able to get Maroney and Addai this past year. My RBs (in a start 1) are big lagers, but they also have big time upside without the same investment. In the off season, as you undoubtedly know, these are the players guys go fishing for. Everyone thinks they will be cheap, but the fact is if I was serious about trading any off them I could get far more then some think. They are the dynasty investments that you let mature before collecting big profits.

A great example of this concept is the NYSE. There are plenty of play-it-safe types that put their cash into blue chips, and few would criticize. For the privilege they very often pay a premium on PE ratings, but for them its worth it. However, in FFB there is only one champion and generally, in keeping with the above example, the guys who get in on the ground floor of an Amazon are going to win it, not the IBM investors.

The trick is to DRAFT WELL. If someone applies the principles in this discussion without taking great players they will fail miserably. Not all our moves will work out, but if we work the angles - ever extracting value variations where they can be found (right player/right owner) - then we will hit more home runs then the guys holding on to their IBM (Harrison) stock.

 

[Biabreakable]

Something I've noticed year in and year out is that dynasty rankings (this isn't pointing fingers at anyone in particular, but at dynasty rankings in general) are behind the curve. In most cases, redraft rankings are modified somewhat as a result of players' ages and that's about it. To me, this does not make them dynasty rankings. Changes occur in the NFL a lot faster than such dynasty rankings account for, and all you need for proof is to look at any two sets of redraft rankings from Year X and Year X+2.

Let's take one example of a current ranking that to me just doesn't work. Brodie Croyle vs. Trent Green. Croyle is ranked anywhere from late QB30s to mid 40s, while Green is ranked in the mid to late 20s. Green will be 37 next year and if all goes well he'll start one more season. If all doesn't go well, he'll start less than a season and be replaced. After that it's Croyle's show for the forseeable future. We have to forget the past and Green's 4,000 yard seasons and remember we are ranking only future value.

Why is this ranking of Green and Croyle not working for me? This is the same situation as Brad Johnson and Tarvaris Jackson this preseason. In this year's preseason dynasty rankings, Johnson was sitting at about QB31 and Tarvaris Jackson late 40s. Johnson was 37 when the year began and everyone knew this was his last year starting. The season's now over and where are they now? Jackson mid 20s and Johnson has ZERO value. If I'm thinking dynasty, no way I'd own Johnson over Jackson to start 2006, but dynasty rankings invariably had it that way becasue Johnson was the current starter. That's a short term approach that is a losing approach in the long run.

Value isn't a name sitting on a fantasy bench. Value is fantasy points usable in a lineup. Johnson was a starting NFL QB but he wasn't going to start for fantasy teams or even be a fantasy QB2 in most cases, so his value was nearly nothing. If Trent Green was a top 12 QB for redraft going into 2007, his current dynasty ranking might be justified because owners would actually be using him, but like Johnson in 2006, Green isn't going to start next year for fantasy teams. He'll be some team's 3rd QB just like Brad Johnson was. So, as a dynasty owner, I'd rather have the future value in Croyle (maybe he's another Brady, who knows?) than hold onto a guy I'm not going to start and see his value become zero in a year.

Again, value is future usable fantasy points, and that's what people need to remember when doing dynasty rankings and choosing among players for rosters. If Green's current usable points will equal Croyle's (zero because he'll be a QB3 and not needed), own the guy instead who will have future upside and rank them both accordingly.

I used Brad Johnson and Tarvaris Jackson as my 2006 example, but I could have used Warner/Leinart or Brunell/Campbell just as easily. It's the same with other positions. Don't look at current year starter as automatically having to be ahead of the backup if it's a one year situation. That's a losing approach when that current year starter isn't your fantasy starter. Take the guy with upside and with a future, and rank them that way. You'll be a far better dynasty player for it.

Vincent Jackson in the WR80s and Eric Parker in the 50s this year was wacko if a person is truly thinking dynasty. Time will show that. Parker may have had more points in 2006, but few owners ever used those points - they were bench points. When Jackson gets his shot full time, he will far surpass Parker's numbers, and for several years. No way I would have owned Parker over Jackson to start 2006.

CPs post from this thread: http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...47171&st=50

 

[Biabreakable]

JayMan's reply to CPs post in the same thread:

Something I've noticed year in and year out is that dynasty rankings (this isn't pointing fingers at anyone in particular, but at dynasty rankings in general) are behind the curve. In most cases, redraft rankings are modified somewhat as a result of players' ages and that's about it. To me, this does not make them dynasty rankings. Changes occur in the NFL a lot faster than such dynasty rankings account for, and all you need for proof is to look at any two sets of redraft rankings from Year X and Year X+2.

[...]

Value isn't a name sitting on a fantasy bench. Value is fantasy points usable in a lineup. Johnson was a starting NFL QB but he wasn't going to start for fantasy teams or even be a fantasy QB2 in most cases, so his value was nearly nothing. Vincent Jackson in the WR80s and Eric Parker in the 50s this year was wacko if a person is truly thinking dynasty. Time will show that. Parker may have had more points in 2006, but few owners ever used those points - they were bench points. When Jackson gets his shot full time, he will far surpass Parker's numbers, and for several years. No way I would have owned Parker over Jackson to start 2006.

Very - probably the post of the year - in my opinion...It nails every aspect of [DYNASTY] rankings flaws in a concise and precise way... excellent post...

Read the post once again - it's worth it - it will let you know all you need to know about [DYNASTY] in 2 minutes...

To draw a financial and mathematical analogy... the present value of an investment is the sum of the cash flows discounted at the appropriate rate... FFwise... the present value of a player is the sum of his starting FF points discounted at the turnover rate in the NFL...

Obvisouly, the sum of the starting FF points is the tricky part... the one you have to figure out yourself... and this is why [DYNASTY] FF is so much fun... will VJackson become an uberstub for the next 5 years or will he be out of the NFL by then?... The turnover rate is related to position (QB/WR have longer careers than RB/TE for example) and thus are affecting the [DYNASTY] value of these players accordingly...

Like CP mentioned - a player that is starting for an NFL team but never does for your FF team - is an absolute waste of a roster spot... the value of a player only reside in the sum of the points he will account for when in your starting lineup... as Jeff mentioned, Joe J or MBooker have some value - they will be in your starting lineup for 1 or 2 or 3 weeks next year - but their ranking value should only be discounting those 1 or 2 or 3 weeks... not the fact that they will get 60 receptions while VJackson only gets 25...

If you think VJackson will get 80/90/100 receptions per year in 2/3/4 years... he certainly will be on your starting lineup week-in week-out... and thus, his [DYNASTY] value (the sum of his cash flows - discounted for in a few years) is certainly far greater than JoeJ's who's value is only the sum of his FF points for a few weeks next year... and not much more...

This only re-enforce the theory that [DYNASTY] leagues are all about uberstuds and the potential "next-ones"... for who's the cash flows are the biggest...

 

[Biabreakable]

I keep this crazy-big spreadsheet with all players, and on part of that I actually do come up with a 'present value' of player values. I use factors such as current and projected role, a projected production curve using a 5 year window that takes into account age and typical production patterns during the player's age window, and a baseline ppg below which a player cannot go (essentially a waiver wire replacement value), and I discount back those future values using both a moderate and a fairly high discount (risk) rate to give me a value range for the player that gives me a sense of his value. It makes no decisions for me, and of course sometimes I make short term decisions because I want to win now, but armed with this data I feel I have a better foundation for making dynasty decisions than I'd have without it.

also from the same thread.I would like to hear in greater detail the formula CP is using here and how he applies it. As well as what others may think of this method.Are you using DD's study of comparative careers as a basis of your projected production curve? Or somthing else?When you discount back the future value what is the formula used? Would this be similar to weighting projections based on years out like gheemoney suggested or somthing else?

 

[wannabee]

what a great thread. Thanks, Bia, for keeping it going and on focus.

 

[rabidfireweasel]

A few different ideas of mine:

Your ideal roster to maximie has a good mix of players under thirty. This is because every year there are some good values to be had by different owners. There will be a guy trying to rebuild, but he has a pesky vet like Ahman Green who is just scoring to many points and causing him to win too many games. He can't make the playoffs but it looks like he may well finish fifth or sixth. He is looking to dump at low cost now, before he wins another game. You can only do business with him if you have young players or some picks. You could look to pick up Green with the intention of moving him immediately to another team as soon as the need arises.

Case in point- the win now guy thought he was OK and was rolling at 6-3 until Portis, Fred Taylor, Curtis Martin, Kevin Jones- whoever, got hurt. He looks at his roster with Harrison and Tiki and sees his window is closing. He will now pay more, in the way of picks than you just did for Ahman Green in a standard or Rudi Johnson in a ppr league. You can only deal with him if you have productive vets that are good but are not superstars.

I think your goal is to play this shell game of acquiring and trading players with slight upticks in value until you get elite players.

This past year I was in a rebuilding mode and I missed out on some great veteran value, because my situation dictated my choices. The vets would not help my team enough, and would be counterproductive to what I was trying to do (get Adrian Peterson).In other years when I was in win now mode, I missed out on some young players because I didn't have the goods.

Unrelated point, after the Patriots first superbowl, I held off a round or two not drafting Brady, because I thought no one would take him as a game manager QB. Just before I was set to draft him, he got drafted by someone who also really liked him. He is still on his roster, despite my numerous attempts to acquire him. Now, I think if there is a young player you really believe in, you do your best to get him. You overpay a bit if need be. Because you are looking at a long, long time of regret if you don't.. I overpaid to draft Vince Young. I traded McGahee for him. Most people thought I was an idiot. I believed that he will be wouldn't do much this year, which would help me be bad and get a high pick in this rookie draft, but that he would be a strong ff QB in the near future. I thought he had too much running ability, enough short touch, and too good a deep ball too flop.The jury is still out on my decision. Ultimately, I decided I would much rather draft Vince Young and have him be a bust on my team than not draft him and have him be the force I thought he would become on someone else's team.

I think it is important not to fall in love with the players on your team who are not clearly elite. There are a handful of elite players- Manning, LT, Chad Johnson, Fitz, Gates. Don't talk yourself into a place where potential guys like Ben Watson become untouchable because they are close to elite or have elite potential.

For young guys, I look for guys who produce key plays (not necessarily highlight plays) in wins. I was ahead of the curve on Domanick Davis (while most were clamoring that the real back was Tony Hollings) because I saw him being productive in the two minute offense in games the Texans won or had a chance to win. Guys that produce in opportunities that result in victories will generally get more opportunities.

My last point for now, is that I think in dynasty rookie drafts, QB's are way undervalued. They are a gamble, because there is a Boller for every Palmer. Still you can pick up guys with high talent/pedigrees well after 1.5: Palmer, Leinart, Rivers, Big Ben, Cutler. Often, after just sitting on them for a year or two, they have a dramatic increase in value- a greater increase than if you have just sat on the pick for a year.

That's all I got for now.

 

[Biabreakable]

Couch tater I like your post about ranking for dynasty and what methods you use in doing that. I really think your thoughts on this belong in this thread : http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...=296123&hl= and I would apprechiate if you would make a contribution to discussion there.

Methodology of ranking and reasoning behind it is the main thing I am trying to get at for discussion there.

By looking at player rankings/projections/values for current year then year +1 year +2 I hear you saying in this thread that you project 5 years out? By doing this we get numbers that can be compared that includes expected future years performance. This would certainly push the ranking of some backup players who may not have any expected value numbers/performance for current year but are expected to produce in following years. I am very curious to hear how you use your spread sheet and what weighting you give to each year respectivly for a combined ranking.

Would also like to hear from JayMan and others on this issue as well.

I'll do that. No promises as to doing it right away though. Available time has been an issue lately.Quickly though, as to projecting 5 years out, no I don't crank detailed projections for that. I project the upcoming year (often using those of others I trust at FBG), and determine whether those projections place the player in his production curve or not (this has to do with whether a player is yet in the role I'm expecting for him). If not, I'll project the following year also. After that I use production curve rates I've come up with through independent research over the years to give me a ballpark idea what ppgs to expect of a player in future years given his age and/or years in the league.

For example, the WR rates I use are 100% at ages 26-27 (what I believe to be a WR's prime), and lesser rates before and after. If I project a 29 year old WR at 9.5 ppg in the upcoming year (Year X) using actual projections, my spreadsheet will calculate Year X+1 at age 30 as 85/90x9.5=9.0 ppg because at 29 he is at 90% of prime and at 30 he is at 85% of prime. In Year X+2 at age 31, it's 80/90x9.5=8.4 ppg, and so on. The decline in rates is not straight line; players drop off more rapidly as time goes on. Also, RBs and WRs and QBs decline at different rates and at different ages. Anyway, once I have a calculated ppg for each year I subtract a 'free replacement' ppg (it will depend on the WW quality in a given league). Let's say it's 5.5, so my hypothetical WR at 29 has a net ppg value of 9.5-5.5=4.0 in Year X, 3.5 in Year X+1, 2.9 in Year X+2, etc. I then discount these values back to Year X. Discounting is necessary because future ppgs are less certain and less valuable right now than current ppgs.

If you want to post this in the other thread, that's cool, but I have to get going for now. Seeya!

 

[Biabreakable]

Excellent posting from many of you. I would agree with CP's premise about value and dismiss worthless points from any thoughts on dynasty rankings. The only issue I had was with the 5 year projection.

By discounting, I take into account the increasing unreliability of future values. However, to ignore years 4 and 5 is a mistake IMO. This would blunt the value difference between players like SJax and SAlex, Fitzgerald and Owens, etc., and could lead to faulty decisions. Shaun Alexander, by the way, is in my mind the poster boy for erroneous dynasty rankings. I see a consensus thread in this forum ranking him very high, and that tells me people haven't learned the lessons of Holmes, Faulk, Terrell Davis, etc. etc. etc.

 

[Biabreakable]

I won't go too deeply into it here, but I use projections and league scoring rules to come up with a ppg value for each player, a time horizon (I use 5 years, some prefer 3 years) and production curve (i.e., pre-prime players improving and post-prime players declining) to determing ppg for future years, subtract from each year's ppg a baseline waiver wire 'free replacement' ppg (result not to go below zero) to come up with a player's ppg over the rabble (thereby taking into account the overall league size issue but not lineup requirements), and then discount each value back to today for a net present value for that player. This gives me a single value for each player, representing today's value of the next 5 years' production over and above 'free replacement' value. Some players have more value today and none in 3 or 5 years, some have little today but potentially lots in 3 or 5 years, and this single number takes into account all my assumptions. The list I've just created doesn't care about bye weeks or lineup requirements. It only cares about long-term value over free replacement value. To me, that is a dynasty list. Of course I want to win now too, not just collect a roster full of prospects whose values may be higher overall but won't come to fruition for 3 years, but I don't try to hybridize my dynasty value list to decide now vs. later value and roster mix for current year needs. The list is only one tool in this balancing act, it is not a draft list, and it does not think for me. Often I will have to sacrifice overall value to win today, but this list gives me a better idea what I'm sacrificing when I choose greater current production over greater overall value.

Again... very, very very ... I thought I was the only one doing this (professional deformation - financial/mathematical)... the only difference being that I look at the complete career instead of a 3year or 5year span in order to discount the values to today...How do I get to the "complete career discounting factors"?... I have looked at every "starter" season from the last 12 years and was able through cubic splined curving to derive a mathematical formula for every offensive position (QB/RB/WR/TE) that show, on average, how much a 4th year WR will improve in year5, year6 - eventually declining to the end of his career...to finally discount these values to today - since values that are 4 years from now carry less weight than those for next year (for example)...I think this is very important, since you obvisouly do this naturally when you value Larry Fitzgerald and Calvin Johnson compared to Derrick Mason for example... you naturally factor in that Fitz will be an uberstud for the next 10 years when you rank him / not only a 3year span...I plan on trying to have a freelance article posted on that exact subject... and am already working on the details of the article... more to come...Also, I'm very pleased to see that CP is calculating a (what he calls) "ppg baseline waiver wire" replacement (interestingly enough, the first time I've seen it here).. you need to do this, in order to make sure that you only value "added" FF points depending on your league requirements... if you can get Eric Parker on the waiver wire and he can get you 5.5 points per game - then you obvisouly don't need to keep a guy on your roster that has a lesser "present value" than that baseline, what I call "risk-free investment rate"... The exact same concept CP is talking about...